The MMI questions works as follows:
A volunteer MMI Interviewer is alone in a room with the student. The Interviewer has NO background information on the student and the student has NO background information on the Interviewer.
The MMI Interviewer then asks the student a hypothetical question, which has NO correct answer. The question asks for the student to give her opinion on a subject on which many doctors, lawyers, professors, mechanics, technicians, Members of Parliament, Congressmen, Congresswomen, Senators, peace officers, authors, performers, women and men hold many different opinions (ie. there is no correct opinion).
The volunteer Interviewer has no expertise and no qualifications in the area or field of the question, hence he cannot assess the quality of the answer. In addition, in a free country opinions are not something which can be held against a person, as in a free country we are entitled to hold whatever opinion we want to hold;
that is the essence of free thought, free conscience, and free speech.
The Interviewer cannot assess how the student presents their opinion or how the student defends their opinion; BECAUSE the volunteer MMI Interviewer has no qualifications and no expertise in assessing how a person expresses themselves or how a person defends their opinion.
To put it another way. The student being asked to express her opinion has as much qualifications and expertise to judge the volunteer MMI Interviewer as the Interviewer has to judge the student.
In other words, its like two strangers meet on a bus; one stranger asks the other an opinion based question, and then if he does not like you or your opinion, he has the power to prevent you from getting into Medical School. That sounds crazy because it is crazy. However, that is what the Medical Schools that use the MMI claim they are doing.
Your proof that the Medical Faculties that use the MMI are fully aware that the MMI questions and answers are WORTHLESS,
is that it is obvious there is no way to know if the student's answer is a lie.
If I ask you what is your opinion on generic drugs, and you tell me you are in favour of them, or you tell me you are against them, how can I know if you are telling me the truth or lying ?
It is impossible to judge people based on their opinions, as a person can tell you any opinion they want to say, and you have no way to know if that is their actual opinion.
The doctors and professors in the Medical Faculties that use the MMI are not so dumb as to believe that when you ask a person their opinion that person will always tell you the truth.
What value then, can there be in asking a person a hypothetical question that has NO correct answer, when you have no way to know if the opinion the person gives you is their true opinion or a lie ?
In addition to using worthless questions, the MMI also
uses improv skits to determine who gets into medical
school; at least that's what the Medical Faculties
that use the MMI claim they are doing.
The MMI skits work as follows:
A volunteer MMI Interviewer is in a room with the
student and one or two actors. The Interviewer has
NO background information on the student and the
student has NO information on the Interviewer.
The student is told what improv skit the actors will be
doing and the student is told what part she will play in
the improv skit. The volunteer MMI Interviewer then
decides if the student gets into Medical School after
watching the student perform in the improv skit.
That sounds crazy because it is crazy. However, that is
what the Medical Schools that use the MMI claim
they are doing.
Your proof that the Medical Faculties that use the MMI are fully aware that the MMI improv skits are WORTHLESS,
is that the doctors in those Medical Faculties have all seen television shows and movies in which actors have portrayed doctors; but none of the Medical Faculty doctors believe that being able to do a good job at portraying a doctor in a movie or in a television show or in an improv skit, has any relevance to how well that actor would do at being a doctor !
The utter and absolute WORTHLESSNESS of the MMI is further demonstrated by the facts that:
The MMI questions and improv skit tests do NOT meet any of the criteria every university and college states is required for a valid test or exam.
No record is kept of the student's answers or skit performance.
No record is kept of the specifics of why points were awarded or taken away by the Volunteer MMI Interviewers.
Students are NOT allowed to know the reasons that points were given to them or taken away from them.
Students are NOT allowed to have the score that was assigned to them checked for validity, fairness, legitimacy, relevance or compliance with the Constitution.
Students are NOT allowed to correct false information or lies that were recorded against them by the MMI Interviewers.
The MMI questions and improv skits have NO correct, NO verifiable, and NO legitimate answers.
The MMI Volunteer Interviewers will give some students very low scores for expressing the same thoughts, beliefs and opinions as are held by many Members of Canada's Parliament and as are held by many of the United States Congresswomen, Congressmen and Senators.
The MMI Volunteer Interviewers can base their score for the student on any type of discrimination they choose, because that score can never be checked or challenged.
There is also another Civil Rights Abuse which the MMI and
other non-merit based admissions criteria make possible.
Because everything about the MMI is in SECRET, the MMI
COULD BE used AS A SMOKE SCREEN for an Admissions
Committee to let in LESS qualified Applicants who have
friends on the Committee, or to keep out Applicants with
better qualifications whose opinions, beliefs, religion,
thoughts, color, place of birth, family, social status, etc.,
a person on the Admissions Committee does not like.
Because everything about the MMI is kept secret, including
how a person's score was determined, what is to stop an
Admissions Committee from, BEFORE THE MMI IS EVEN
STARTED, telling a few of the MMI Interviewers which
Applicants they must give high scores and which Applicants
must be given low scores, so that the Applicants the
Committee wants to let in will be dishonestly given
just enough dishonest high scores and the Applicants
the Committee wants to keep out will be given just enough
dishonest low scores, to make it work out that those whom
the Committee wanted to let in got the over-all higher
scores and those the Committee wanted excluded got the
over-all lower scores ?
Think about it, if only a few of the MMI Interviewers give
you a dishonestly low score, that alone can drop you a
whole letter grade, which keeps you out. It only takes
a small percentage drop to lower an "A" to a "B".
Therefore, if an Admissions Committee wants to control
who gets in, they don't need to conspire with all of the
MMI Interviewers, because it only takes a few dishonest
scores to keep you out.
In addition, scoring based on a person's opinions, even if done correctly, is a HUGE VIOLATION of Civil Rights and of Constitutional Rights, because in a free country, people are entitled to express whatever opinion they want to express, without their opinion being held against them; THAT IS THE ESSENCE OF FREE SPEECH.
All other freedoms are based on Free Speech. If you cannot freely express your political views, and you cannot freely express your views of new scientific concepts, and you cannot freely express your religious views, and you cannot freely express your opinions on social issues; YOU HAVE NO DEMOCRACY and YOU HAVE NO FREEDOM.
There is NO science to the MMI. There is no science to the other non-merit based admissions criteria some professors, doctors and administrators use so that they can discriminate and select people they chose, instead of giving all students an equal opportunity based on verifiable merit based criteria.
They are afraid to let me question them and their "experts" in an open public trial or in an open public inquiry because they know that would prove them to be discriminators, breachers of free speech, violators of civil rights, breachers of the Constitutions of both Canada and the United States, and breachers of the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights.