University of Sydney Medicine undergraduate (1 Viewer)

[quickoats]

what are the differences in skillset between the 2 approaches?
Surely the exceptional focus/determination/intelligience of someone capable of 99.95 would transfer over enough to do well in both?

This is more an exercise of “let’s stop the smart kids running to unsw undergrad (and never GAMSATing to usyd in the long run) and also conveniently leeching 7 years of fees off them”.

 

[Trebla]

I imagine most of them to be highly intelligent, highly tutored, lacking in social skills/life experiences, naturally gifted at maths, having amazing drive and focus.
Are you implying that most of them are just fairly intelligent kids that worked hard and got lucky?

I would've thought the 99.95ers would be worse at practical exams and surgery in general as they probably have worse hand eye coordination, having missed out on sports/computer gaming etc which their lower ATAR scoring peers were engaging in while the 99.95s were at tutoring?
Also, if prac exams involve taking patient histories/presenting cases/other interpersonal communication methods then the 99.95s would do worse as they likely have less developed social skills than the lower scoring ATAR peers

I also wonder if they end up in more academic /university positions and specialties requiring less interpersonal interaction like pathology/haematology

This idea of someone getting 99.95 having below average social skills or hand-eye coordination is a terribly inaccurate stereotype.

A lot of people I knew in uni who got 99+ or HD averages were highly social and generally well rounded. In my cohort for example, the president of the USyd Science Society (which is basically a popularity contest) topped the state in Maths Ext1 and got a UAI of 100.00 (as it was known back then). I knew her personally as she was in my classes and she was basically a socialite/party animal but still maintained a HD average throughout uni. The president that came after her was someone who started combined BSc(Adv)/Medicine so presumably got 99.95. In undergraduate Law, the majority of students there would have got 99+ and many are quite social and really great communicators (they often get involved with student politics etc). The common theme is that these people were very smart/talented/hard-working but were also able to hit that efficiency sweet spot in balancing their academics with extracurriculars/socialising.

In high school, I used to think that social skills are a necessary sacrifice to do well academically because I didn't really have those types of "all rounders" at school. However, that view was challenged so many times over at uni when I met so many people who topped the cohort academically and had a very active social life. Whilst there are certainly some high achievers who may fit that "nerdy" stereotype, there are just as many who don't.

 

[Beyblader]

This idea of someone getting 99.95 having below average social skills or hand-eye coordination is a terribly inaccurate stereotype.

A lot of people I knew in uni who got 99+ or HD averages were highly social and generally well rounded. In my cohort for example, the president of the USyd Science Society (which is basically a popularity contest) topped the state in Maths Ext1 and got a UAI of 100.00 (as it was known back then). I knew her personally as she was in my classes and she was basically a socialite/party animal but still maintained a HD average throughout uni. The president that came after her was someone who started combined BSc(Adv)/Medicine so presumably got 99.95. In undergraduate Law, the majority of students there would have got 99+ and many are quite social and really great communicators (they often get involved with student politics etc). The common theme is that these people were very smart/talented/hard-working but were also able to hit that efficiency sweet spot in balancing their academics with extracurriculars/socialising.

In high school, I used to think that social skills are a necessary sacrifice to do well academically because I didn't really have those types of "all rounders" at school. However, that view was challenged so many times over at uni when I met so many people who topped the cohort academically and had a very active social life. Whilst there are certainly some high achievers who may fit that "nerdy" stereotype, there are just as many who don't.

in my mind I think of 99.95 as very different from 99+ as accomplishing 99.95 is a whole different level to 99.90 but regardless it’s interesting to hear about your presidents. I guess there are a small number of people who genuinely function at a much higher level than the rest of the population

 

[idkkdi]

in my mind I think of 99.95 as very different from 99+ as accomplishing 99.95 is a whole different level to 99.90 but regardless it’s interesting to hear about your presidents. I guess there are a small number of people who genuinely function at a much higher level than the rest of the population

99.95 is different to 99. difference from 99.90 is trivial.
HSC is more so a test of seeing how good you are at getting the marks. Even 4u maths as of now is not difficult enough to differentiate between the @Qeru's and the never make silly error dude. And if you look at VCE's and other states, this is even truer as their maths is a joke compared to NSW.

 

[Trebla]

When you go to uni, you would not be able to accurately guess who got 99.95 vs 99.00 purely off their personality or social skills. The correlation isn’t as strong as people make it out to be.

 

[Qeru]

99.95 is different to 99. difference from 99.90 is trivial.
HSC is more so a test of seeing how good you are at getting the marks. Even 4u maths as of now is not difficult enough to differentiate between the @Qeru's and the never make silly error dude. And if you look at VCE's and other states, this is even truer as their maths is a joke compared to NSW.

Yeah I would agree with his statement if all tests were like BOS trials, but you don't really need to be a genius to succeed in HSC.

 

[quickoats]

Even 4u maths as of now is not difficult enough to differentiate between the @Qeru's and the never make silly error dude. And if you look at VCE's and other states, this is even truer as their maths is a joke compared to NSW.

Yep I'm not that bright but did p well at 4u... definitely not a genius (just had neat handwriting and a dose of good luck on the day) so I refute the idea that the best test of intelligence in the HSC is 4u maths. However, the other subjects are even more of a memory/luck game but the one key thing is consistent hard work - you don't get 99.95 by just stumbling across a leprechaun one day.