Is Health Sci a bird program?

[cling]

how can you compare when you havent done it? you are an outsider looking in... all you have is hersay... and rumors...

 

Sure, I never did cocaine, but I have seen a lot of people who have. It doesn't seem to be anything like doing yoga. Get it? Don't have to try everything before you can have a clear view on it. And if you believe it is easier to get an A GPA in engineering than in health sci, I recommend you do some yoga, that other stuff will kill ya

[AdamP]

Sure, I never did cocaine, but I have seen a lot of people who have. It doesn't seem to be anything like doing yoga. Get it? Don't have to try everything before you can have a clear view on it. And if you believe it is easier to get an A GPA in engineering than in health sci, I recommend you do some yoga, that other stuff will kill ya

 

 

are you in engineering, where and stream?

[bling]

your ignorance actually pains me.

 

First of all, let's look at Queen's med school as an example. Last year, they implemented a system where admission was based 100% on interview after making the cut off. So a health sci with a 4.0 would not be at any more of an advantage than engineers/astronauts with a 3.85 (or whatever the cut off was). MANY health sciences students were still successful at the interview stage, and currently make up a considerable proportion of that class. I think that demonstrates the calibre of students in the program... our program is full of talented/well-rounded individuals who would make great physicians. DON'T GET ME WRONG, I wouldn't be so ignorant as to say that these students don't exist elsewhere (obviously they do), but it just goes to show that even with the effect of GPA "eliminated", health sciences students will still continue to be successful.

 

Doesn't mean we shouldn't try.

 

 

 

 

Life is not fair, sure. Does it mean it shouldn't be made more fair? Of course not. Med school admissions do care and they are constantly working on ways to improve the admissions process. They are openminded people who understand the problems and will try their best to make it as good as possible.

 

 

 

Not everyone decided to become a doctor (or didn't give in to their parents' pressure) in highschool. Many people decide they want to pursue medicine during university, when people tend to be more mature and in touch with reality when it comes to the medical field. These people should not be at a disadvantage.

[Jacques Cartier]

Sorry, you're right, and all I'm going on is my own experience and what I've heard from others. The only reason that I use health sci as an example is because the courses that I've taken were easier than my core program courses. The average was higher and the material was easier, yet it is a very restricted sample size, I admit.

There's a general arts course than many people take at my university with an average mark of 4.0!

 

In the end, my point is that some programs are easier than others. I'm sorry if I've offended any health sci students - you are probably all very smart people and will make great physicians. I would imagine that you're also very well prepared for med school.

 

Please don't get me wrong though, my opinion still stands: the admissions process should be modified.

[missy10]

listen missy ;p

 

you really gotta feel that iron ring to know what i'm talking about

 

well at least now you will have SOMETHING to impress women with...

[AdamP]

well at least now you will have SOMETHING to impress women with...

 

the cougars love it

 

i'd let you hold it, but with your dutch ways it'd probably be in the pawn shop in a matter of minutes

[missy10]

the cougars love it

 

i'd let you hold it, but with your dutch ways it'd probably be in the pawn shop in a matter of minutes

 

last i checked RACISM wasn't cool... why don't you go lay bricks... it really is Italy's specialty... next to making pasta

[cling]

your ignorance actually pains me.

 

First of all, let's look at Queen's med school as an example. Last year, they implemented a system where admission was based 100% on interview after making the cut off. So a health sci with a 4.0 would not be at any more of an advantage than engineers/astronauts with a 3.85 (or whatever the cut off was). MANY health sciences students were still successful at the interview stage, and currently make up a considerable proportion of that class.

 

I know many engineers/science "specialists" who made Queens MCAT cutoffs and never made the GPA cutoff. Some of them had scores in the 99.6th percentile and never got an interview.

 

Who cares if the interview is 100% when people don't make the cutoffs/ don't get to the interview stage? Common sense, right? Your argument doesn't hold water.

[~me~]

I know many engineers/science "specialists" who made Queens MCAT cutoffs and never made the GPA cutoff. Some of them had scores in the 99.6th percentile and never got an interview.

 

Is it possible that some may have had a lackluster first year? Slacked off? It's impossible to claim causation here, you do realize that, don't you?

 

and FYI, I know some hth scis who are brilliant people who did not meet the GPA cut-offs either. What does that have to do with anything?

[AdamP]

OK so some people need to really think about what they are saying here.

 

First of all, a real engineer (or scientist for that matter) would be proud of his program, and take pride that he or she can do a **** load of work in their undergrad and still get in to meds.

 

The fact of the matter is if you want to compare things at a relative scale go ahead, we’re in a program where the average grad has a job lined up before their 4th year, and is perfectly happy with getting 65s, graduating and joining the work force. For someone that wants to put in a slightly higher amount, and i mean slightly because that’s all you need to get effing great marks you can meet the cutoffs for meds. Now imagine you joined a program with 160 of the smartest high school grads from across the country who were all keeners and want to go to meds. Do you not think no matter what the case there is going to be a high standard as opposed to 160 eng kids who are just looking for that passing mark to get a degree.

 

The fact of the matter is every issue is complex and there are no silver bullet solutions, if I was only looking for GPA I’d take a heavier program than one filled with pre-med keeners any day.

[Jack Donaghy]

Just to add to the growing debate, I think we can all agree that GPA's aren't created equally. There is a lot of variability between programs, institutions, and even the same course year-to-year. If there were a way to rank programs into some sort of academic hierarchy and give preferential weighting to students in the most difficult programs, I would certainly support that. But there isn't, as we know it.

 

One thing that Canadian schools could do to make medical school more accessible to those who chose more difficult programs is to increase the value of the MCAT. As a standardized test, it does place students on a "medical preparedness" curve, as far as academics are concerned. Though not perfect, someone who scores in the 99.6th percentile on the MCAT is (very) academically suited to complete a medical degree. With such a high score, they should never be denied an interview.

 

Maybe medical schools should have different sets of weights, i.e., a higher MCAT cutoff for those who don't make the first GPA cutoff. For example, suppose the cutoffs are a 3.75 GPA and a 30 MCAT. Someone with a 3.65 GPA could then be granted an interview with a 35 MCAT. Thoughts?

[Microbiodude]

how about just adding course averages beside an individual's mark? that way the adcom can see how well an "average" person who took exactly the same courses as you did would have done. that way adcoms can simply put a GPA differential as a cut-off (i.e. you have to beat the average by __%). This way there's incentive for students to take "non-bird" courses and in some ways it standardizes GPAs for you. If all Ontario Universities agree on this, they can implement it in the future...

[missy10]

how about just adding course averages beside an individual's mark? that way the adcom can see how well an "average" person who took exactly the same courses as you did would have done. that way adcoms can simply put a GPA differential as a cut-off (i.e. you have to beat the average by __%). This way there's incentive for students to take "non-bird" courses and in some ways it standardizes GPAs for you. If all Ontario Universities agree on this, they can implement it in the future...

 

this is not a good idea... especially if one program had a cutoff of 95% from highschool and another one 70%... it just wouldnt make sense...

[cling]

how about just adding course averages beside an individual's mark? that way the adcom can see how well an "average" person who took exactly the same courses as you did would have done. that way adcoms can simply put a GPA differential as a cut-off (i.e. you have to beat the average by __%). This way there's incentive for students to take "non-bird" courses and in some ways it standardizes GPAs for you. If all Ontario Universities agree on this, they can implement it in the future...

 

Pretty cool suggestion. This way it doesn't matter if you are a health sci or an engineer, because you are scored relative to people who took the same course with you. Sort of like what they do for the MCAT.

[Star1234]

I'd like to get back to the point that I made earlier where I really believe that if you really like the program you are in, you will WANT to study and will ultimately end up doing well, regardless of how much more difficult it is according to its reputation.

 

My friend started out in physiology because her parents wanted her to be a dentist, absolutely hated it and was getting 60's. She switched to honours mechanical engineering and ended up graduating with high 80's. So as you can see, you can't make generalizations about programs. It really depends on the individual and how much effort they're willing to put into their program.

[princess19]

Nail on the head. To make our attempts at reform be noticed, I emailed several adcoms with this link, so hopefully the discussion doesn't go to waste. Keep it going.

 

this is total bs. last time i checked there isn't a list of admission committees email addresses. plus you'd have to send it from your email address which would be risking your anonymity, which would be a terribly stupid move as it would reveal your complete and total ignorance. this thread is among the most ridiculous threads i've ever read. engineers seem to be awfully bitter...stop complaining and focus your energy into school instead of whining all the time, and maybe your marks would go up! no admissions system is perfect, but schools do try to control for GPA. many schools have a relatively low cut-off (that should be reasonably met regardless of the program...yes even those applying from engineering) and then base final decisions 100% on the interview so GPA no longer comes into play as previously mentioned by someone else, while others (such as U of T & Memorial) say that they take into account the difficulty of the applicant's courses. in fact, U of T drops a number of your lowest marks with the specific mandate of encouraging applicants to take more challenging courses in university. unfortunately for the engineers, if that's not enough for you and you bombed your entire degree, then maybe you should enroll in a "bird program" like health sci for your 2nd degree. you'd come out with a 4.0 average by doing no work, right??

[cling]

this is total bs. last time i checked there isn't a list of admission committees email addresses. plus you'd have to send it from your email address which would be risking your anonymity, which would be a terribly stupid move as it would reveal your complete and total ignorance.

 

There are emails posted on the "Contact Us" page. I used a Gmail account. Pretty anonymous.

[n00b]

hello adcom

[Guest Dalboy]

I really like Microbiodude's suggestion. Instead of being scored based on GPA, your scored based upon how many grade levels you are over the class average. For instance, A- with a B+ average would be a score of 1.

This could really work because Western already has a rule where your course level should for the most part correspond to the year that you're in. I don't know about other programs, but in mine averages went from C+/B- in 1st/2nd year to around B+/A- in 3rd/4th year. So if %60 of my courses have to be 3rd year or above, it becomes quite hard to pad my score. I could take easy classes, but so are all my 3rd/4th year peers who have survived the weeding out process and I likely won't score very well. I could take a brutally hard course, get a B but look great to med schools since the average was say, hypothetically, a C.

So its not such a bad idea because in the only 2 years that schools look at, the stragglers have been weeded out of all programs, leaving stiff competition so averages should be roughly similar. Even programs mostly full of less intelligent individuals such as sociology see an increase in average to ~B+ in the 3rd/4th year courses, so there really shouldn't be any way of escaping this system.

My lowest grade in university was in organic chem but I was still 3 letter grades above the average so I hate that that plummets my GPA when I did relatively well. It should be adding 3 to my score!

[bubblebath]

Damn, this whole thread is making me wish I'd accepted my position in Health Sci, instead of going to Queen's

[fireball]

I really like Microbiodude's suggestion. Instead of being scored based on GPA, your scored based upon how many grade levels you are over the class average. For instance, A- with a B+ average would be a score of 1.

This could really work because Western already has a rule where your course level should for the most part correspond to the year that you're in. I don't know about other programs, but in mine averages went from C+/B- in 1st/2nd year to around B+/A- in 3rd/4th year. So if %60 of my courses have to be 3rd year or above, it becomes quite hard to pad my score. I could take easy classes, but so are all my 3rd/4th year peers who have survived the weeding out process and I likely won't score very well. I could take a brutally hard course, get a B but look great to med schools since the average was say, hypothetically, a C.

So its not such a bad idea because in the only 2 years that schools look at, the stragglers have been weeded out of all programs, leaving stiff competition so averages should be roughly similar. Even programs mostly full of less intelligent individuals such as sociology see an increase in average to ~B+ in the 3rd/4th year courses, so there really shouldn't be any way of escaping this system.

My lowest grade in university was in organic chem but I was still 3 letter grades above the average so I hate that that plummets my GPA when I did relatively well. It should be adding 3 to my score!

 

Aka everyone has a z-score for their class! Cool idea....

[Guest Dalboy]

This could also potentially control grade inflation because smart kids who actually do well in classes would be banking on low averages and would complain extensively about profs who hand out grades to the less gifted students. Right now, I couldn't care less if a prof is giving a moron a good grade just for ****s and giggles. That moron should not pose any sort of threat to me in the long run. However, if that affected my score, there would be hell to pay and I assume that would be the reaction from all overachieving premed students.

[rmorelan]

Interesting Idea! It would force ALL the schools to calculate this though and that might not be an easy task, at least in the short term.

 

It might cause the oppositie problem - some health sci students are claiming that their student body is comprised of above average students. if that is true, then this scheme would punish them - they may be superior students but compare to the other superior students in their program they might be simply average. Note - I am supporting or rejecting their claims about the quality of these programs, I just don't know specifics about other programs than the ones I am in

 

Actually a program like computer/systems engineering, or straight computer science at waterloo would be similarly punished - that program really does have extremely smart people in it. So there really are cases where programs relatively speaking overselect superior academic students relative to other programs.

 

Your system is also similar to the MCAT strategy of standardized grading....perhaps that really is a better way of assessing academic ability?

 

I really like Microbiodude's suggestion. Instead of being scored based on GPA, your scored based upon how many grade levels you are over the class average. For instance, A- with a B+ average would be a score of 1.

This could really work because Western already has a rule where your course level should for the most part correspond to the year that you're in. I don't know about other programs, but in mine averages went from C+/B- in 1st/2nd year to around B+/A- in 3rd/4th year. So if %60 of my courses have to be 3rd year or above, it becomes quite hard to pad my score. I could take easy classes, but so are all my 3rd/4th year peers who have survived the weeding out process and I likely won't score very well. I could take a brutally hard course, get a B but look great to med schools since the average was say, hypothetically, a C.

So its not such a bad idea because in the only 2 years that schools look at, the stragglers have been weeded out of all programs, leaving stiff competition so averages should be roughly similar. Even programs mostly full of less intelligent individuals such as sociology see an increase in average to ~B+ in the 3rd/4th year courses, so there really shouldn't be any way of escaping this system.

My lowest grade in university was in organic chem but I was still 3 letter grades above the average so I hate that that plummets my GPA when I did relatively well. It should be adding 3 to my score!

[cling]

Your system is also similar to the MCAT strategy of standardized grading....perhaps that really is a better way of assessing academic ability?

Well, no kidding! However, we use MCAT as a cutoff, where we don't allow it to distinguish from good and amazing students. Using something like the 80th percentile cutoff doesn't allow the adcom to see who are the trully outstanding minds in terms of academics.

 

We should use the MCAT the way we use GPA right now. As a continuous scale, not a cutoff: i.e. a student with a 40 MCAT is given advantage over a student with a 32, just like a student with a 4.0 GPA is given advantage over a student with a 3.8. However, the 40 and 32 are scored in a highly controlled environment, while the 4.0 could be in health science, while the 3.8 is in engineering.

[Guest Dalboy]

Ah, my plan does have flaws. I didn't think about the programs with only brilliant people. I do think my plan is still far and above better than using GPA.

I'm not a huge proponent of the MCAT but only because the biggest moron I know scored high 30s and the smartest person I know scored low 20s. Maybe I'm just focusing on outliers and therefore coming to irrational conclusions. I also don't like the thought of wasting another summer on the MCAT after scoring on the brink of acceptability.

 

Maybe every school should be like Ottawa. They assess the difficulty of your courses and most people don't get interviews because of ABs. Nothing to do with academics. Then again, focusing on ABs rather than academics would further screw over the engineers because I have never ever ever heard of an engineering student (from Queens, Western and Dal ... and I know alot of them) volunteering anywhere, let alone a hospital. Don't get me wrong, engineers are typically brilliant, great, fun people and maybe you posters are different, but if the majority of engineers that I know said they wanted to go into medicine, I would question if they really knew what they were getting into.

 

So yeah ripping on the health sci's is great but please understand that medicine is as much an art as a science and the art is far harder to grasp than the science will ever be. Working/Volunteering in hospitals, doing team based projects etc.. is all preparation for this art. Working through equations is not; that only prepares you for the easier aspect of medicine. This health science program, just from what I've read on this post, seems like the best preparation for the art of medicine that I've heard of. Therefore, I don't give a sh*t if their grades are inflated or not because they should make one hell of a doctor.