number of places versus number of applicants

Discuss applications to the clearing house (and to courses that are not in the clearing house system), screening assessments, interviews, reserve lists, places, etc. here
Speaker
Posts: 12
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2019 12:44 pm

Re: number of places versus number of applicants

Post by Speaker » Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:41 am

RJParker wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:14 am
I suspect that figure will vary significantly based on the specific programme. Our rate would be under 1% for example.
That's really interesting. 1-20% is quite a variation between different courses?

Advertisement
Pearson Clinical Assessment publishes a wide range of assessments to support psychology professionals including the Gold Standard Wechsler range. To view our range please visit: pearsonclinical.co.uk/cpf
RJParker
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: number of places versus number of applicants

Post by RJParker » Wed Sep 25, 2019 12:38 pm

Speaker wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:41 am
RJParker wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:14 am
I suspect that figure will vary significantly based on the specific programme. Our rate would be under 1% for example.
That's really interesting. 1-20% is quite a variation between different courses?
Clearly we're at the lower end due to our approach to minimum criteria - just flagging that generalising the figure might not work so well in reality.

HWoody
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2016 11:14 am

Re: number of places versus number of applicants

Post by HWoody » Wed Sep 25, 2019 1:20 pm

I suspect that figure will vary significantly based on the specific programme. Our rate would be under 1% for example.
That's really interesting. 1-20% is quite a variation between different courses?
I agree, it would very useful if this information was in the public domain, as it may be the case that some of the most competitive looking courses (in terms of numbers that apply) may not be as bad after all (and visa versa).

It would also be interesting to know what factors affect whether a course has high numbers of applicants who don't fulfil minimum criteria (e.g. Is it the stringency of criteria or something about the profile of applicant?)?

User avatar
maven
Site Admin
Posts: 2163
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: number of places versus number of applicants

Post by maven » Thu Sep 26, 2019 12:06 am

RJParker wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:14 am
I suspect that figure will vary significantly based on the specific programme. Our rate would be under 1% for example.
You think less than 1% of applicants don't have GBC? Or don't have right to live and work in the UK? Or don't have completed qualifications to the standard required? I'd be very surprised if that is the case!
Maven.

Wise men talk because they have something to say, fools because they have to say something - Plato
The fool thinks himself to be wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool - Shakespeare

RJParker
Posts: 237
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: number of places versus number of applicants

Post by RJParker » Thu Sep 26, 2019 7:57 am

maven wrote:
Thu Sep 26, 2019 12:06 am
RJParker wrote:
Wed Sep 25, 2019 11:14 am
I suspect that figure will vary significantly based on the specific programme. Our rate would be under 1% for example.
You think less than 1% of applicants don't have GBC? Or don't have right to live and work in the UK? Or don't have completed qualifications to the standard required? I'd be very surprised if that is the case!
By our rate I refer to the rate at Lancaster which I know is under 1% because I personally do that check.

lakeland
Posts: 932
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: number of places versus number of applicants

Post by lakeland » Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:01 am

I feel like Lancaster is the most inclusive of courses - in terms of their minimum criteria so that doesn't surprise me.

User avatar
maven
Site Admin
Posts: 2163
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:00 pm

Re: number of places versus number of applicants

Post by maven » Thu Sep 26, 2019 7:29 pm

lakeland wrote:
Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:01 am
I feel like Lancaster is the most inclusive of courses - in terms of their minimum criteria so that doesn't surprise me.
I know you are very inclusive in terms of experience and academic grades, I just thought that all courses got a share of the applicants that don't meet the requirements for training like GBC and the right to live/work in the UK. We get so many in AP applications that don't have a degree, or haven't qualified yet, or don't have GBC or live in countries where they would require a sponsorship visa to be employable, and I know it is an issue in training applications generally, so I was surprised to hear that you get less than 5 ineligible applicants per year.
Maven.

Wise men talk because they have something to say, fools because they have to say something - Plato
The fool thinks himself to be wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool - Shakespeare

User avatar
Spatch
Posts: 1374
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 4:18 pm
Location: The other side of paradise
Contact:

Re: number of places versus number of applicants

Post by Spatch » Thu Sep 26, 2019 8:25 pm

I think it was higher for the course I selected for, but then again it was at a University that was quite well known internationally, so had a fair few candidates who I suspect applied for institutional prestige rather than understanding the nature of a DClinPsy and their own readiness for training.
Shameless plug alert:

Irrelevant Experience: The Secret Diary of an Assistant Psychologist is available at Amazon
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Irrelevant-Expe ... 00EQFE5JW/

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests