Mac Health Sci Pool?

[itimebomb2]

I heard a rumour that McMaster Health Sciences students get put in a seperate pool of applications altogether at U of T. Has anyone heard of this and is there any merit to it?

[Microbiodude]

I have never heard of this and I highly doubt that's true. They do have a graduate application pool though.

[mattg]

Sounds like a definite rumour. However, it is true that the large majority of Mac Health Sci's get into med school (I think >70%). But that's just because they are all really involved with the school and volunteering and all of the premed stuff for the most part, and mac health sci is known for giving everyone really high marks... I don't want to start a debate or anything like that, but I know many health sci students that have admit this, taken many health sci courses, and know for a fact that the lrage majority of the provost honour roll (4.0 honour roll) is made up of health scis, even though they have a very small faculty

[ChicoMaki]

I must admit that I've heard this from a prof in mac meds who has friends on UTs adcom. Apparently, after separating the applications, they actually sift through the transcript to see the "vigorous" course work you've taken. Quite interesting.

[AdamP]

I must admit that I've heard this from a prof in mac meds who has friends on UTs adcom. Apparently, after separating the applications, they actually sift through the transcript to see the "vigorous" course work you've taken. Quite interesting.

 

hmmmmmm, very interesting if true.

[Caliver]

I must admit that I've heard this from a prof in mac meds who has friends on UTs adcom. Apparently, after separating the applications, they actually sift through the transcript to see the "vigorous" course work you've taken. Quite interesting.

 

if that is true (although I highly doubt it), does that mean mac health scis are at disadvantage?..

[AdamP]

I don't think we'll ever know fully.

 

I'm really gonna try not to open a can of worms here, there are literally hundreds of pages of mac health sci battles on these forums.

 

All that can be said for certain is that u of t is one of the few schools (I think one out west may as well) that PUBLICLY states that it considers the rigor of the undergraduate program when looking at GPAs.

 

Does this mean health scis are at a disadvan/advan? Who knows. My guess is they're treated the same as Hon. life sci. grads from other schools.

[Caliver]

yeah, i read all those "battles" when i had to choose between mac health sci and u of t life sci.

but what is there for mac health sci to form a separate pile lol..

[touchthesky]

I don't think we'll ever know fully.

 

I'm really gonna try not to open a can of worms here, there are literally hundreds of pages of mac health sci battles on these forums.

 

All that can be said for certain is that u of t is one of the few schools (I think one out west may as well) that PUBLICLY states that it considers the rigor of the undergraduate program when looking at GPAs.

 

Does this mean health scis are at a disadvan/advan? Who knows. My guess is they're treated the same as Hon. life sci. grads from other schools.

 

In regards to rigor, do they take applicants less seriously if, for say, one scores an A+ in a class with an A- class avg? The upper year specialist courses at U of T are smaller and everyone in the specialist works reallllly hard...making the avg that high. Thoughts?

 

As for the Mac Health Sci - ya, I had to decide against this program in favour of U of T. I ultimately chose U of T because of the research programs and proximity to the major hospitals. As well, I've heard that Mac Health Sci is

'easier' than most other undergrad programs; esentially it is the Mac Med School pre-med program. Personally I am not a fan of the self-directed learning approach that Mac uses, so that was another factor for my decision.

[1234]

sigh... more rumours...

 

How can UofT Adcom evaluate Health Science courses? By their name? The courses are constructed with very distinct goals in mind. Courses are as valuable as student make them. They have goals that aren't explicitly listed in course descriptions. As Alastris stated, every transcript is evaluated for rigor. But how important is this evaluation in the greater scheme of the application process as an entirity. From the number of Health Science students interviewed, and the number accepted, it is very clear to me that even if specific Health Science transcript evaluation is being undertaken, it is irrelevant (to say the least). A little critical analysis would have led you to that conclusion.

 

To the guy that picked UofT over Mac Health Sci, I hope everything works out for you. You seem to be averse to self-direction. That's fine. But why do you need to be near big hospitals? You are in undergrad. It seems to me that your pre-selection research was a little lacking.

 

1234

Mac Health Sci '08

UofT Med 1T2

[Caliver]

Hey 1234,

 

So would you say those health sci specific courses are rigorous enough for u of t admissions? There's no real way of comparing those courses at mac with courses at other schools as they don't exist at other schools..

 

Thanks!

[itimebomb2]

Thats no news. They explicitly said that rigor of coursework is taken into account, which they measure by seeing if you moved from basic courses in a specific field to more advanced ones.

 

It has been off their website since last year.

 

 

Mac Health Sci isn't better than every program, it is just different, and I doubt that UT ad coms would ever be foolish enough to put them in a separate pile.

 

How do you that this is how they measure rigour?

[1234]

Hey 1234,

 

So would you say those health sci specific courses are rigorous enough for u of t admissions? There's no real way of comparing those courses at mac with courses at other schools as they don't exist at other schools..

 

Thanks!

 

Medical schools don't compare specific courses at one school versus another because this is impossible. No one can actually know the true difficulty of a course through a course description or course name. I believe rigor is simply evaluated through ensuring that a student takes an adequate number of year-specific courses. They just want to be sure that a fourth year isn't excessively participating in 1st year courses.

 

I'm not sure why there is so much doubt about the Health Sci program. With so many students entering medical schools in Ontario, in Canada and around the world, if there was a discrepency between GPA and actual performance in the medical program, I'm sure schools would have recognized and flagged the program.

 

To this point, I believe Health Science students represent the largest group of graduates from a single program in most medical schools in Ontario and I have yet the hear of any issues.

[grapz]

They definitely look at the rigor of your course work, to see a steady progression in either difficulty or try to see if your interests add up. They see that you actually take courses that your interested in, instead of random courses

[pebz]

Well if you consider UofT's Pathobiology program, which requires a 3.9 gpa in first year to get in, then i'm pretty sure they beat Mac's Health sci in terms of acceptance rates. Pretty much every1 in this program gets into med, except for the ones that persue research

[Caliver]

Well if you consider UofT's Pathobiology program, which requires a 3.9 gpa in first year to get in, then i'm pretty sure they beat Mac's Health sci in terms of acceptance rates. Pretty much every1 in this program gets into med, except for the ones that persue research

 

Not true. I have friends at UofT switching out of Pathobiology program because it was simply too hard for them. I've heard from them that they had the same dream of going into med school from pathobiology but found out it simply wasn't true. As there are people getting 3.9+ there are more people on the lower level.

Also, i doubt the acceptance rates is 20:1 for the program.

[pebz]

Not true. I have friends at UofT switching out of Pathobiology program because it was simply too hard for them. I've heard from them that they had the same dream of going into med school from pathobiology but found out it simply wasn't true. As there are people getting 3.9+ there are more people on the lower level.

Also, i doubt the acceptance rates is 20:1 for the program.

 

That fact only supports my statement.

 

All the people that were unfit, because they thought it was too hard, dropped out. Leaving the better ones.

[Caliver]

That fact only supports my statement.

 

All the people that were unfit, because they thought it was too hard, dropped out. Leaving the better ones.

 

you said 'everyone in the program'. That includes people who dropped out too.

i haven't been in the university system yet so I can't tell for sure but I don't think one program is significantly better than others.

[touchthesky]

sigh... more rumours...

 

To the guy that picked UofT over Mac Health Sci, I hope everything works out for you. You seem to be averse to self-direction. That's fine. But why do you need to be near big hospitals? You are in undergrad. It seems to me that your pre-selection research was a little lacking.

 

1234

Mac Health Sci '08

UofT Med 1T2

 

Hey 1234,

 

I am not averse to self-direction at all! lol...I just prefer the lecture style as opposed to small group discussions for my undergrad. In terms of proximity to hospitals - I've actually had a lot of significant experiences since the end of my first year volunteering, shadowing, and working with physicians. I really like the diversity of my experience and I've also learned a lot from it. While I am not doing small classes and observerships as another student above noted, I think it's extremely valuable for undergraduate students to get involved in these hospitals before entering medical school for the sole purpose of learning how to communicate with patients and understand what the hospital environment is like. While you can get that at other universities and hospitals, I feel that it is easier to keep involvement during the year while being a U of T student. Again, I really don't know what it's like at other universities, and I'm sure students have equally great things to say about their respective schools; personally for me, I've really enjoyed the exposure to research I've gotten through U of T, and I'm glad I chose this school for my undergrad.

 

Beyond that - it's quite easy for an undergrad at U of T to get lab experience with the plethora of research labs right around the corner; again, I'm not saying that you can't do the same at other schools, but the diversity and the availability of the opportunities at U of T are, in my opinion, very unique. I hope you are enjoying your time at U of T, 1234!

 

And I'm not a guy lol.

[1234]

Hey 1234,

 

I am not averse to self-direction at all! lol...I just prefer the lecture style as opposed to small group discussions for my undergrad. In terms of proximity to hospitals - I've actually had a lot of significant experiences since the end of my first year volunteering, shadowing, and working with physicians. I really like the diversity of my experience and I've also learned a lot from it. While I am not doing small classes and observerships as another student above noted, I think it's extremely valuable for undergraduate students to get involved in these hospitals before entering medical school for the sole purpose of learning how to communicate with patients and understand what the hospital environment is like. While you can get that at other universities and hospitals, I feel that it is easier to keep involvement during the year while being a U of T student. Again, I really don't know what it's like at other universities, and I'm sure students have equally great things to say about their respective schools; personally for me, I've really enjoyed the exposure to research I've gotten through U of T, and I'm glad I chose this school for my undergrad.

 

Beyond that - it's quite easy for an undergrad at U of T to get lab experience with the plethora of research labs right around the corner; again, I'm not saying that you can't do the same at other schools, but the diversity and the availability of the opportunities at U of T are, in my opinion, very unique. I hope you are enjoying your time at U of T, 1234!

 

And I'm not a guy lol.

 

My bad, Ms. Touchthesky

 

Fair enough. You didn't give me enough to work with with your initial post, but this response demonstrates a solid thought process. Thus, I can respect your stance.

 

Every university environment has a unique amalgamation of characteristics that fit each student to different levels. Since my stance on undergraduate education is very different from yours, it makes sense that we have different preferences on our location of undergraduate study. I believe undergraduate knowledge (100% of what is tested) is, for lack of a better word, useless. Students learn it, regurgitate it, and then forget 90% of it. Thus, I believe undergraduate knowledge is a stimulus for skill and personal development. While I agree that lectures are better medium for knowledge acquisition, I believe that small groups provide an interactive environment more conducive to personal development.

 

Hopefully, UofT provides you with the avenue to pursue your next steps in education and a future career. Believe me, I am not a UofT basher; however, I - along with a significant majority - agree that UofT is not an ideal selection for an undergraduate program. UofT, at the undergraduate stage, is well recognized as a dreamcrusher. UofT professional programs and graduate degrees are well recognized as mediums for the realization of dreams.

[1234]

you said 'everyone in the program'. That includes people who dropped out too.

i haven't been in the university system yet so I can't tell for sure but I don't think one program is significantly better than others.

 

You're right. Overall, most undergraduate programs are generally the same quality. However, programs are different. Each has their own benefits and shortfalls, whether they be class sizes, access to professors, responsiveness to students, number of electives, etc. Thus, each prospective student must assess their own styles and perspectives, as one will be most successful in environment that most compliments their strengths.

[Carefree]

I believe undergraduate knowledge (100% of what is tested) is, for lack of a better word, useless.

 

I disagree. As a graduate from the Biochemistry Program at McMaster I had the opportunity to apply a great deal of the content learned in lectures to the lab setting. During this time I gained 3 years of productive research and was able to contribute to my field. Undergrad was well worth my tuition money.

 

Not to stir anything up, but MOST of my Health Sci friends at Mac share your idea that undergrad is/was useless. Perhaps it's the structure of the program that makes you all feel that way, or the mentality that your program coordinators instill throughout the 4 years.

[KennethToronto]

Dear 1234,

 

Summer is almost over. Don't you have better things to do?

[1234]

I disagree. As a graduate from the Biochemistry Program at McMaster I had the opportunity to apply a great deal of the content learned in lectures to the lab setting. During this time I gained 3 years of productive research and was able to contribute to my field. Undergrad was well worth my tuition money.

 

Not to stir anything up, but MOST of my Health Sci friends at Mac share your idea that undergrad is/was useless. Perhaps it's the structure of the program that makes you all feel that way, or the mentality that your program coordinators instill throughout the 4 years.

 

I'm talking about knowledge that will ultimately transfer to a career. Of course some of the knowledge that you learn in lecture and what you do in lab is going to be related. They are part of the same curriculum! Most careers (barring some research pursuits) have little in common with even related undergraduate curriculums. And even in lab environments, it is the general concept the is applicable, not the minutae that is spoonfed in hours upon hours of lectures, most of which will be ultimately useless, irrelevant and forgotten.

 

And where did I say that undergraduate degrees are useless? And where did I say that undergraduate programs were not worth the money? I said that knowledge is largely irrelevant because curriculums cannot be designed to train students to meet the expectations of every career. Thus, going to my point, I believe an undergraduate program the facilitates skill development rather than knowledge acquisition is far more valuable in the long run. You are entitled to disagree. When you get to your next stage of your career and compare it to your notes, I assure you that you will hardly find any commonality, let alone remember what was on those pages. What you will truly understand and remember is what you did in a lab setting - critical thinking, problem solving, effectively working within teams - an interactive setting that promoted true growth and far more valuable in your future career (again, IMO).

 

It is not the structure of the program that provides us with this idea. And program designers don't instill ideas within us. They are cultivated from within the interactive medium of educated minds. We have been provided the opportunity to discuss and ponder, and this is our cross-generational epiphany. And since it is across many generations of Health Science students, it is not a spurious conclusion, but one based on logic, debate and evidence. But feel free to disagree. Ultimately, I will do what is best for my growth. And you will do the same for yourself.

[1234]

Dear 1234,

 

Summer is almost over. Don't you have better things to do?

 

It's a Thursday haha. No parties or drinking to do. Might as well resuscitate the mind before the year starts.