Not sure what to do. Need advice.

[AdamP]

i really don't understand the need to try and minimize the value of a health sci degree. unless you are IN the program, you really don't know the difficulty of our courses and you're not in a position to judge the worth of a "health sci A+ vs an engineering A+". last time i checked engineers have quite a few courses offered through their faculty such as "professional engineering" which give them a break so stop trying to make everyone feel sorry for the engineers. there is a reason why NO ontario med schools require a specific undergrad degree - as long as you have completed the prerequisites and attained the minimum GPA in the program of your choice, you are eligible to apply. if you are convinced that engineering is sooo much harder and you want to go into medicine, then feel free to choose something else, but they sure don't deserve special consideration. i don't understand the endless debate over which degree is "better" or who has grades which are overly inflated. i don't doubt that engineers have to work hard for their marks, but so do students in all other undergrad programs, including health sci. trying to argue that engineers or whoever else have to work "harder" or that some people have it "easier" is pointless and completely based on the very biased opinions of a few people. english is often targeted as a "joke" when some of the english literature courses are among the most challenging courses offered. don't try and diminish the hard work of others when you have no idea what they have accomplished or how much effort they've put into their learning. these types of generalizations and value judgments of undergrad programs are very unnecessary and offensive.

 

 

So I am going to agree with some of your points here, I don't believe engineers should be given some "special" consideration or that degrees should be ranked in the sense that people are trying to argue on this thread. Not only is it impractical but there would be some serious fairness questions that would be hard to address and judge.

 

However I think there are some empirical things that can be looked at when judging relative "workloads". The easiest and most transparent would be to consider the number of courses. I don't think anyone can reasonably say that someone taking 5 psychology courses has the same workload or academic rigour as someone doing 6-7 engineering courses (most of them with labs+projects+weekly assignments) which also is mandated under the Canadian engineering accreditation board meaning that there are specific learning goals that must be met (similar in nursing).

 

So how are these differences taken care of, obviously the most simple first step is to take the best five courses from any program. Beyond that it's diffuclt to say what can easily and transparetnly be applied across the board.

 

Just also one last point you seem to be pretty adamant about not judging the merits of programs you know nothing about, the "professional engineering" or engineering ethics courses you speak of are far from a break, not only being one of the most important components of an engineering education they are probably some of the highest in terms of workload.

[cling]

And if you had to pick a year's mandatory courses for hth scis, why not 2nd year, which is more grueling that most other programs I know of? Why such a biased view?

 

In your second year, every required course is a health sci course...with class averages above A-. That is not grueling. Don't get me started on the courseload...i.e. Do a poster for 100% of the grade, no exams and so on...

 

 

As far as thesis work goes, every program has a thesis course. Nothing new nor special about health sci.

[rmorelan]

- why is it unfair to expect an engineer to compete for a similar GPA as a health sci? study hard in either program, do your homework and do well on your tests/essays/exams, and you will get a high mark.

 

Engineering in SOME cases should be considered a special case. Toronto engineering (at least a few years ago) actually curves grades to force an average of a set grade (70?). Point is you are actually competing against your class, their grades are not just a measure of academic ability, but actually a ranking as well. It is quite possible in high end programs there to have VERY hard working, skilled people get a B. Likely in a different program these people would get an high A.

 

Anyway trying getting a string of 90+ in that school Engineering in general has that same sort of rigid marking systems. I think in part that is why engineer CONSTANTLY gets brought up as the a counter example.

[~me~]

In your second year, every required course is a health sci course...with class averages above A-. That is not grueling. Don't get me started on the courseload...i.e. Do a poster for 100% of the grade, no exams and so on...

 

And you think the poster comes out of thin air? You don't appreciate the hard work, group meetings that last all night, meetings with profs, that happen before the poster gets made? You think we all sit down one day, decide what our poster is going to be on, and just start making it???

 

After having gone through 4 yrs in health sci, please - give me courses like immunology and biochemistry and chemistry and physics which have exams. They are SO MUCH EASIER than self-directed courses.

 

And our class avg is an A- in every course. I know this has been repeated many times. But I'm just stating it again.

 

Finally, whether or not our grades are inflated as per your argument, can you really claim/prove that hth sci's make poorer doctors? At the end of the day, our degree, whether or not YOU believe it to be rigorous, gives us the opportunity to explore a lot more than the Kreb's cycle (which we do too).

 

Also, this is going to be my last post on the matter. You really are staying true to your name by clinging on to your arguments despite evidence to the contrary. If you don't want to give what I, or other health scis have to say, a fair thought, I don't feel the need to tell you what I think, since it is so poorly received.

 

Good luck with the rest of the year and with your exams. And whether or not you want to believe it, I have exams too, lol. And they aren't posters

[cling]

And you think the poster comes out of thin air? You don't appreciate the hard work, group meetings that last all night, meetings with profs, that happen before the poster gets made?

This happens in every program.

 

You think we all sit down one day, decide what our poster is going to be on, and just start making it???

Why not?

 

After having gone through 4 yrs in health sci, please - give me courses like immunology and biochemistry and chemistry and physics which have exams. They are SO MUCH EASIER than self-directed courses.

 

Sure. Take the MCAT. Since all Health Scis are geniouses, you guys should favor MCAT most than anyone else. Right?

 

 

 

Finally, whether or not our grades are inflated as per your argument, can you really claim/prove that hth sci's make poorer doctors?

No, you guys might even be better doctors than the rest. However, we are talking about the admissions system and how certain programs such as health sci limit the usefulness of criteria such as the undergrad GPA.

 

 

You really are staying true to your name by clinging on to your arguments despite evidence to the contrary.

Of course I will stick to my arguments. In the great scheme of things, that doesn't matter. This is meant to be a discussion where the reader decides for himself the validity of either position. And by throwing in the towel, it really doesn't help you or your classmates much.

[n00b]

Fairness US med school system: While I agree with Cling on some issues, I strongly disagree on this. First of all, most US school have MASSIVE affirmative action policies, where URM can get into medicine with GPAs < 3.4 and MCATS < 21 with relative ease, with 15-20% of spots reserved. Aside from AA for african canadians at DAL, and AA for a few spots at most schools for aboriginals, most Canadians are on equal footing (aside from expected regional preferences). US schools are also subjective, and allow for powerful people on the inside to advocate for applicants they know.

 

First of all, the part about URMs getting in with MCAT <21 with relative ease is false. Second, the spots are not reserved. Ever think that maybe the 15-20% of spots (if that figure is even true), is because URMs (Blacks, Latinos, etc) actually comprise 30% of the US population?

 

With regards to the reserved spots, I think you are confusing US schools with NOSM, UWO, etc who ACTUALLY reserve spots for northerners, SWOMEN, etc.

 

GG.

[n00b]

And if you had to pick a year's mandatory courses for hth scis, why not 2nd year, which is more grueling that most other programs I know of? Why such a biased view?

 

Most of us have no idea about this info, let alone how to find it. Be kind enough to post it?

[bling]

This happens in every program.

 

 

Of course I will stick to my arguments. In the great scheme of things, that doesn't matter. This is meant to be a discussion where the reader decides for himself the validity of either position. And by throwing in the towel, it really doesn't help you or your classmates much.

 

 

 

 

wow.... you must have no friends . i'm sorry.

[missy10]

i dont understand why people feel the need to point out how easy health sci is and then when someone like tenbruggs87 or ~me~ make arguments as to how it is actually difficult then cling says "this happens in every program" thus validating that we arent that much different... hahha good job cling... nice argument

 

Here n00b is the homepage for health sci at mac

http://fhs.mcmaster.ca/bhsc/

 

Here are the required courses:

 

Level I: 21 units required courses

6 units HTH SCI 1I06 (cell biology)

6 units CHEM 1A03,1AA3

6 units HTH SCI 1E06 (inquiry)

3 units HTH SCI 1G03 (psychobiology)

1 course Science 1A00

9 units elective courses

30 units Level I total

 

Level II: 21 units required courses

3 units HTH SCI 2A03 (biostats)

3 units HTH SCI 2E03 (inquiry II - biochem)

3 units HTH SCI 2F03 (anatomy I)

3 units HTH SCI 2FF3 (anatomy II)

3 units HTH SCI 2G03 (epidemiology)

3 units HTH SCI 2J03 (health psychology)

3 units HTH SCI 2K03 (cell biology II)

9 units elective courses

30 units Level II total

 

Level III: 12 units required courses

3 units HTH SCI 3E03 (inquiry III)

3 units HTH SCI 3G03 (critical appraisal of the medical literature)

3 units HTH SCI 3GG3 (health policy)

3 units HTH SCI 3H03 (independent project)

18 units elective courses

30 units Level III total

 

Level IV: 9 - 12 units required courses

9 or 6 units HTH SCI 4A09 or 4B06 (thesis project)

3 units HTH SCI 4X03 (inquiry IV)

18 - 21 units elective courses

30 units Level IV total

[cling]

 

Here n00b is the homepage for health sci at mac

http://fhs.mcmaster.ca/bhsc/

 

Here are the required courses:

 

Level I: 21 units required courses

6 units HTH SCI 1I06 (cell biology)

6 units CHEM 1A03,1AA3

6 units HTH SCI 1E06 (inquiry)

3 units HTH SCI 1G03 (psychobiology)

1 course Science 1A00

9 units elective courses

30 units Level I total

 

Level II: 21 units required courses

3 units HTH SCI 2A03 (biostats)

3 units HTH SCI 2E03 (inquiry II - biochem)

3 units HTH SCI 2F03 (anatomy I)

3 units HTH SCI 2FF3 (anatomy II)

3 units HTH SCI 2G03 (epidemiology)

3 units HTH SCI 2J03 (health psychology)

3 units HTH SCI 2K03 (cell biology II)

9 units elective courses

30 units Level II total

 

Level III: 12 units required courses

3 units HTH SCI 3E03 (inquiry III)

3 units HTH SCI 3G03 (critical appraisal of the medical literature)

3 units HTH SCI 3GG3 (health policy)

3 units HTH SCI 3H03 (independent project)

18 units elective courses

30 units Level III total

 

Level IV: 9 - 12 units required courses

9 or 6 units HTH SCI 4A09 or 4B06 (thesis project)

3 units HTH SCI 4X03 (inquiry IV)

18 - 21 units elective courses

30 units Level IV total

 

Good. Now post the class average for every one of the HTH SCI classes. Yeah, that's what I thought.

[~me~]

Good. Now post the class average for every one of the HTH SCI classes. Yeah, that's what I thought.

 

Short term memory loss, much??

 

They're probably A-s, just like the hth sci avg in every other [challenging] university course.

 

Geez.

[AdamP]

 

And our class avg is an A- in every course. I know this has been repeated many times. But I'm just stating it again.

 

 

 

That's pretty incredible information....

 

Just coming from a place (chem eng) where 32% of the class fails a midterm on a regular basis (see: Mass Transfer) A- average seems like a heavenly place to be.

[bling]

Short term memory loss, much??

 

They're probably A-s, just like the hth sci avg in every other [challenging] university course.

 

Geez.

 

actually for Anatomy&Physiology, which is a health sci course taken by nursing, midwifery, biomedical engineers and health sci students, the average is A- only for health sci students. other faculties' averages in the same course are consistently around 20% lower..

 

p.s. the midterms, exams, and bellringers are the same for all faculties, except for nursing students who don't have to do bellringers.

[~me~]

actually for Anatomy&Physiology, which is a health sci course taken by nursing, midwifery, biomedical engineers and health sci students, the average is A- only for health sci students. other faculties' averages in the same course are consistently around 20% lower..

 

p.s. the midterms, exams, and bellringers are the same for all faculties, except for nursing students who don't have to do bellringers.

 

Oh true say; that had slipped my mind

[cling]

actually for Anatomy&Physiology, which is a health sci course taken by nursing, midwifery, biomedical engineers and health sci students, the average is A- only for health sci students. other faculties' averages in the same course are consistently around 20% lower..

 

Can you post a link to that ?

[bling]

Can you post a link to that ?

 

this information is coming from documents containing every individual student's marks (organized by program & student #). you can only download the attachment if you're a student in the course (because it's not posted on public forums...with good reason). but feel free to confirm this information with any student in any of the programs (nursing, midwifery, biomed engineering, health sci)!

[cling]

Bottom line is that Health Sci is a bird program, A- average is ridiculous, regardless how well your students do in high school.

[dbjones]

Can you enter that program with the intention of obtaining it as a second degree? Or is it reserved for students from highschool with high averages?

[AdamP]

I think it may be my bad on misunderstanding the info

 

When you say A- average do you mean A- average for Health Sci. students in courses that are composed of many faculties (understanable)? Or do you mean A- average in courses restricted to heath sci students?

 

Just because this thread has been totally hijacked, to the OP do the extra year get a 3.9 and you'll be good to go, your marks are trending up....

[bling]

Bottom line is that Health Sci is a bird program, A- average is ridiculous, regardless how well your students do in high school.

 

wow. what a great rebuttal. too bad your program (what program are you in, anyway?) doesn't teach you about evidence-based arguments

[~me~]

I think it may be my bad on misunderstanding the info

 

When you say A- average do you mean A- average for Health Sci. students in courses that are composed of many faculties (understanable)? Or do you mean A- average in courses restricted to heath sci students?

 

Just because this thread has been totally hijacked, to the OP do the extra year get a 3.9 and you'll be good to go, your marks are trending up....

 

both 10 char

[cling]

I think it may be my bad on misunderstanding the info

 

When you say A- average do you mean A- average for Health Sci. students in courses that are composed of many faculties (understanable)? Or do you mean A- average in courses restricted to heath sci students?

 

Just because this thread has been totally hijacked, to the OP do the extra year get a 3.9 and you'll be good to go, your marks are trending up....

 

HTH SCI courses have A- averages or higher.

[Jacques Cartier]

From my experience as a science student who's taken first and second year health sci courses, I've found them much much easier than any other courses I've taken (maybe on par with the psych courses).

 

There's no way that a program with lower avg. entering grades from high school should have a courses with higher university avg. than tougher courses (albeit, it seems as though students from other faculties bring up the course averages in Health Sci).

 

In my opinion, its easier to have achieve higher grades in health sci classes than science (and I'm sure engineering). If the average student is ?smarter (-better at school) in engineering or science (as evidenced by HS GPA), then the averages should also be higher by the same proportion in undergrad.

 

Med schools should definitely take this into account, but proper conversions would be too difficult because of variations between schools, years, professors and the population of the particular class. Besides, undergrad schools don't publish their mean and SD of grades anyways, nevermind the other variables. Its just not feasible to do a proper and fair conversion and so its easier not to do one at all.

 

Everything I said is very subjective, and it's just an opinion.

[n00b]

glad you had a bit of downtime from your busy day schedule of exploring the st lawrence river to give us some insight into grade inflation

[Alastriss]

HTH SCI courses have A- averages or higher.

 

Life sci courses at queen's (especially upper year) are like that too. I have had a 4th year class of 24 people with a class average of 86.