The Graduate Medical School Admissions Test (GAMSAT) is widely regarded as one of the most demanding entrance examinations for postgraduate medicine and dentistry across Australia, Ireland, and the United Kingdom.
The exam evaluates not only academic knowledge, but the ability to reason critically, synthesise ideas, and communicate with conceptual precision under pressure. It assesses scientific understanding, humanities reasoning, and — crucially — written communication.
GAMSAT consists of three sections:
- Section 1: Reasoning in Humanities
- Section 2: Written Communication
- Section 3: Reasoning in Biological and Physical Sciences
Section 2, the written component, examines a candidate’s ability to organise ideas logically, construct persuasive arguments, and respond to abstract prompts with depth and control. It is not merely a test of fluency. It is a test of structure, intellectual discipline, and conceptual clarity.
Why These Essays Are Presented
The essays presented in this Philosophy section are not final works. They are not polished 70+ responses. They represent my starting point.
When I began preparing for the GAMSAT in March 2020, I assumed Section 2 would require minimal preparation. With experience in academic writing through dental publications and a Bachelor of Arts degree, I believed I was sufficiently prepared. I was mistaken.
Under exam conditions — particularly handwritten at the time — I struggled to organise ideas coherently in response to ambiguous and philosophically broad themes. Writing ability alone was insufficient. Without structural control, even familiarity with complex topics proved ineffective.
The essays published here reflect that stage. They demonstrate what happens when structure is underdeveloped, when argumentation lacks architectural clarity, and when ideas are not strategically framed.
I am presenting them intentionally — not as exemplars, but as evidence of the learning curve.
Establishing Structure
To build a foundational framework, I enrolled in the GAMSAT Essay Writing Course organised by the METC Institute. Their approach emphasised a structured Thesis–Antithesis–Synthesis (TAS) model, formal academic tone, and disciplined argumentative development.
This formulaic structure was valuable. It provided:
- A repeatable method under time pressure
- Clear paragraph architecture
- A systematic way to engage with competing ideas
The essays shown here were submitted to METC and marked accordingly. To increase objectivity, I also forwarded the same unedited essays to two separate institutions for independent marking:
- AceGAMSAT
- Gold Standard GAMSAT
The variations in scoring illustrate an important reality: GAMSAT marking contains subjectivity. However, consistent structural weaknesses were identifiable across markers.
Themes Covered
The foundational essays address themes such as:
- Ageing
- Ambition
- Courage
- Death
- Education
- Equality
- Friends
- Knowledge
- Love
- Money
- Poverty
- Punishment
- Religion
- Science
These topics represent the early stage of my Section 2 preparation — before plateauing in the mid-to-high 60s, and before identifying what differentiates a 65–69 script from one in the 70+ band.
What This Section Represents
This Philosophy collection is the beginning of the trajectory.
It documents:
- Structural immaturity
- Overreliance on surface-level argumentation
- Early attempts at disciplined formatting
- The gap between “good writing” and “exam-ready writing”
These essays are intentionally preserved as a baseline.
They demonstrate that without structure, Section 2 becomes disproportionately difficult — even for confident writers.
Moving Forward
I am currently preparing a concluding piece titled:
How to Break the 70+ Barrier in GAMSAT Section 2
This article documents the empirical progression from these early essays (scoring in the mid-50s range) through the structured 60s plateau, and into externally marked scripts in the low-to-mid 70s range.
The objective is not to present theory. It is to demonstrate evolution — structurally, conceptually, and psychologically.
If you are preparing for a future GAMSAT sitting, I hope this documented progression clarifies one essential point:
Improvement in Section 2 is not accidental.
It is architectural.
Good luck with your preparation!:)