BMATs and LNATs

OK, we've had a few queries about these.

LNATs - as the clever lawyer noticed, we're dumping them next year. As you've correctly summised, we haven't found them particularly useful and, given the trouble you have to go to to take them, it seemed wise to get rid of them. We check that they reflect our decisions but generally trust our own judgement more (I say 'our' - I don't actually choose any applicants).

BMATs - These are useful but, again the interviewers are super-experienced and trust their own judgement much more. Otherwise put, your interview, previous school attainment (which is weighted for your school's performance so don't worry if your school isn't the greatest) and your work experience will count for much more. Conversely, a superb BMAT won't make up for any serious lack in the above which is why we felt safe deselecting before BMAT. But BMAT can be helpful in slightly seperating the very top and borderline candidates.

As for borderlines, poolable results at BMAT etc., we just don't take that kind of cookie-cutter approach. We look at individuals. A big message is that different successful candidates will be successful for dinfferent reasons and will have different combinations of good points. We also look at the marks in relation to each other more than in comparison to a set percentage.

Hope that clarifies things a bit.