Finished 4 years of McMaster Health Science: best premed

[peace2012]

enlighten me please, but what mandatory (and challenging) courses do life science students take that health sci students do not take?

 

It depends on your specialization. Things such as Genetics, micro/Molecular biology, organic chem (although you say most of them take orgo, but it is not mandatory for you guys), physics, or generally, other mandatory biochem , biology or physical chemistry (2nd year) courses or any course that requires writing lab reports (lab courses) that are required for life science related specializations.

[lauder123]

The number of exams you will have really depends on the student. There is a lot of elective space so some students do minor in psych, biochem, chemistry etc or take courses to fullfill perquisites (i..e physics, organic chem, microbe). There are also various "science" courses such as pathophys, pathoanatomy (human cadaver dissections), immunology, virology, medical genetics, and etc that you can take in third or fourth year. I know some students who had even published a paper in biochemistry, immunology and etc in their undergrad, and are doing their Msc/Phds in these areas (there are some grads who are Vanier and Rhodes scholars; even look at the listing of md/phd students at UofT... there are many from Mac BHSc). So to say that they don't know what kinases/phosphorylases are based on what you hear from one or two student is ridiculous.

 

my conclusion of the program is that like any other program, there are very good students (the ones who really enjoy learning, challenging themselves etc) and not so good students (slack off, take the easy road/courses, only cares about getting into med school etc.).

 

(PS I am not in the program but I am very good friends with some people who use to be in the program).

[lauder123]

very inappropriate to get patient interaction in an undergrad program, but that is another topic.

 

you learn how to beat the system and get into med school by getting interview prep in an undergrad program. you guys dont really learn science. in terms of actual knowledge, health sci doesnt learn much. it makes your communication skills/people skills better and helps you with interview prep and stuff, but i was speaking in terms of actual scientific knowledge/lab work.

 

...there are a lot of students from non-science backgrounds who are premeds or are currently in medical school (particularly mcmaster medical school).

[Organomegaly]

the exam was given 2 months in advance this year. everyone got 90% on it.[/QUOTE]

 

lol

 

let us all accept deadlybutterfly as an authority on all things BHSc related, because it happens that everytime he has an opinion he conjures up individuals to validate the false information to the rest of you. last time it was his health sci cousin who was giving him a learnlink tour of all the ilicit tests we have stored en masse. now, he has apparently sat through group meetings in the flesh, able to comprehensively comment on the productivity of such meetings and boldly assert that only one eight of them was real work.

 

for your information, the average on the cell bio exam for my year was 73. and next to no-one received an A+ in the course. In fact, NOBODY from my year provosted (4.0). Most were held back from the cell bio course, which is actually very challenging though you are clearly too attached to your precious multiple choice exams to see any other assessment as a valid form of learning.

 

And to the individuals who are shocked to hear health scis don't know what a kinase is....ever thought to verify the information first instead of just gasping and appearing scandalized?

[seeking1]

It depends on your specialization. Things such as Genetics, micro/Molecular biology, organic chem (although you say most of them take orgo, but it is not mandatory for you guys), physics, or generally, other mandatory biochem , biology or physical chemistry (2nd year) courses or any course that requires writing lab reports (lab courses) that are required for life science related specializations.

 

There is no requirement to take very specialized, possibly hard science courses for applying to medical school in Canada.

[Organomegaly]

Ya but the rest of us had 5 that tend to be cramped together while trying to get in our end of year labs, papers and assignments. and one sem I had 2 midterms for every course. You can debate whether exams are useful but in the end, that's the way evaluation is done and that's what our marks are based on. Mac health sci doesn't have the same rigorous exam testing. 3 is typically the most you will have.

 

Mac health sci teaches you a breadth of information you won't get anywhere else.

 

At BHSc, here are things you will learn really well

 

1) anatomy & physiology

2) statistics

3) epidemiology

4) critical appraisal of medical literature

5) health policy

6) group work & professional skills (i.e. communication, collaboration)

 

My peers who went to medical school from BHSc are most thankful for these courses and the goal of the program is to expose you to all these really important subjects, in addition to biochemistry/cell bio/other hard sciences. If life sci or kin or "Honours Molecular biology and genetics" offers the same breadth of topics, I will be pleasantly surprised.

 

Notice I didn't include biochem or cell bio in that list. That's because I didn't learn a lot of DIVERSE content from those courses. You get a trigger and work on a project for the rest of the semester. Example: for HTH SCI 2K03, our trigger was Alzheimer's and mitochondria. In the process, we investigated intracellular organelle transport, mtDNA, mutation regulatory systems, systemic factors (chemokines/cytokines etc), links of neural tissue to muscular tissue, oxidative stress,the systemic effects of exercise on these factors and links to pathophysiology of other diseases like diabetes and CVD (which were the other two groups in our tutorial). In these tutorial discusses we bridge the information each group surmised for that week to find links across pathologies and genuinely understand the processes at play.

 

We also confer with a professor in bimonthly interviews who monitors the inquiry process. Yes, the average grade in the course is A. But does that mean it isn't rigorous? Does it mean it isn't a fantastic learning opportunity? In this course not only did I hone my research skills by accessing different sources of information, but I developed my communication skills by actively participating in the weekly tutorial seminars. I became a better group member by expanding my sensitivities to issues my peers may be facing during the inquiry process. When group conflict arose, our group rose to the challenge and consulted a peer tutor to help us defeat the hurdle. These health sci project courses (biochem included) are a SOCIAL learning experience as well...and I think people really forget that and get caught up in the fact that no, we don't learn as wide a BREADTH of information as you get in a classical biochemistry course. But we do learn certain topics very well, and this is the important part because it provides the context to develop a much richer skill set than simply committing to memory 32 lectures of information.

 

And not all of our courses are like this. Anatomy and statistics are at the other spectrum. These are classic hardcore courses that do demand a huge amount of time as well. And you're right - here people are more likely to do poorly because the group work aspect is gone and the accountability is now placed on an individual. As a whole, we still do very well though, and if you ask any engineering or nursing student who took anatomy with us, you will know that it is not because it is easy. I must have logged three dozens hours in two weeks (studying specimens, not reviewing material) in the anatomy lab in preparing for our final bellringer exam, and I wasn't even the one in there the most.

 

The people who are at mac med must now know Dr.Ball. He will tell you himself that the 2nd year anatomy in BHSc is among the hardest across the country - the iRAT quizzes you receive are sometimes identical to the ones we received as just undergraduates. Yet the average in this course is still A-/A. Ask Dr.Ball why he thinks it is that high. I would be very interested in hearing his response.

[katakari]

 

The people who are at mac med must now know Dr.Ball.

 

Mah boi.

 

Also you Turkey.

[Organomegaly]

Mah boi.

 

Also you Turkey.

 

 

love ya kanakari

 

i'm gonna be an anatomy TA just so I can harass you in the lab some more

[nelsojc]

Mac health sci teaches you a breadth of information you won't get anywhere else.

 

At BHSc, here are things you will learn really well

 

1) anatomy & physiology

2) statistics

3) epidemiology

4) critical appraisal of medical literature

5) health policy

6) group work & professional skills (i.e. communication, collaboration)

 

My peers who went to medical school from BHSc are most thankful for these courses and the goal of the program is to expose you to all these really important subjects, in addition to biochemistry/cell bio/other hard sciences. If life sci or kin or "Honours Molecular biology and genetics" offers the same breadth of topics, I will be pleasantly surprised.

 

Notice I didn't include biochem or cell bio in that list. That's because I didn't learn a lot of DIVERSE content from those courses. You get a trigger and work on a project for the rest of the semester. Example: for HTH SCI 2K03, our trigger was Alzheimer's and mitochondria. In the process, we investigated intracellular organelle transport, mtDNA, mutation regulatory systems, systemic factors (chemokines/cytokines etc), links of neural tissue to muscular tissue, oxidative stress,the systemic effects of exercise on these factors and links to pathophysiology of other diseases like diabetes and CVD (which were the other two groups in our tutorial). In these tutorial discusses we bridge the information each group surmised for that week to find links across pathologies and genuinely understand the processes at play.

 

We also confer with a professor in bimonthly interviews who monitors the inquiry process. Yes, the average grade in the course is A. But does that mean it isn't rigorous? Does it mean it isn't a fantastic learning opportunity? In this course not only did I hone my research skills by accessing different sources of information, but I developed my communication skills by actively participating in the weekly tutorial seminars. I became a better group member by expanding my sensitivities to issues my peers may be facing during the inquiry process. When group conflict arose, our group rose to the challenge and consulted a peer tutor to help us defeat the hurdle. These health sci project courses (biochem included) are a SOCIAL learning experience as well...and I think people really forget that and get caught up in the fact that no, we don't learn as wide a BREADTH of information as you get in a classical biochemistry course. But we do learn certain topics very well, and this is the important part because it provides the context to develop a much richer skill set than simply committing to memory 32 lectures of information.

 

And not all of our courses are like this. Anatomy and statistics are at the other spectrum. These are classic hardcore courses that do demand a huge amount of time as well. And you're right - here people are more likely to do poorly because the group work aspect is gone and the accountability is now placed on an individual. As a whole, we still do very well though, and if you ask any engineering or nursing student who took anatomy with us, you will know that it is not because it is easy. I must have logged three dozens hours in two weeks (studying specimens, not reviewing material) in the anatomy lab in preparing for our final bellringer exam, and I wasn't even the one in there the most.

 

The people who are at mac med must now know Dr.Ball. He will tell you himself that the 2nd year anatomy in BHSc is among the hardest across the country - the iRAT quizzes you receive are sometimes identical to the ones we received as just undergraduates. Yet the average in this course is still A-/A. Ask Dr.Ball why he thinks it is that high. I would be very interested in hearing his response.

 

lol this is funny the anatomy and statistics health science courses are extremely easy

[peace2012]

the exam was given 2 months in advance this year. everyone got 90% on it.[/QUOTE]

 

lol

 

let us all accept deadlybutterfly as an authority on all things BHSc related, because it happens that everytime he has an opinion he conjures up individuals to validate the false information to the rest of you. last time it was his health sci cousin who was giving him a learnlink tour of all the ilicit tests we have stored en masse. now, he has apparently sat through group meetings in the flesh, able to comprehensively comment on the productivity of such meetings and boldly assert that only one eight of them was real work.

 

for your information, the average on the cell bio exam for my year was 73. and next to no-one received an A+ in the course. In fact, NOBODY from my year provosted (4.0). Most were held back from the cell bio course, which is actually very challenging though you are clearly too attached to your precious multiple choice exams to see any other assessment as a valid form of learning.

 

And to the individuals who are shocked to hear health scis don't know what a kinase is....ever thought to verify the information first instead of just gasping and appearing scandalized?

 

What is your year exactly? every year theres around >30 provost's honours for health scis, which is much higher than all the other faculties combined. If the exam average was bad (73? That is NOT a bad average at all for an exam, U of T life scis would love to have that exam avg). But lets stop debating about this, since what is the point? Med school only cares about the GPA not your school or program...

[Organomegaly]

 

What is your year exactly? every year theres around >30 provost's honours for health scis, which is much higher than all the other faculties combined. If the exam average was bad (73? That is NOT a bad average at all for an exam, U of T life scis would love to have that exam avg). But lets stop debating about this, since what is the point? Med school only cares about the GPA not your school or program...

 

2012-2013.

You can verify the information here

http://www.mcmaster.ca/univsec/mtgdocs/ugc/UGC-PKG(25Feb2014).pdf

 

The debate was never about what med schools care about. I was defending the legitimacy of the program as adequate preparation for further studies in the absence of traditional cirricula. I was attempting to point out that other skills are developed when you don't have to memorize all your lecture notes. An argument was made about the usefulness of a course where apparently health scis learn "no biochemistry" - I intended to refute that claim for any readers who may stumble upon the misinformation. As soon as I make these arguments, I get dismissed because it is pointless and med schools don't really care what the program is... however, this is the same outcome oriented line of reasoning that perpetuates close mindedness in education. Others are putting forth that because BHSc students have higher grades, somehow their learning is inferior. I'm not even talking about the grades inflation issue at heart here - the biggest issue is that the learning in the program is being attacked and I feel passionately enough about the very valuable skills we learn to defend it. Grade inflation isn't something that can be objectively discussed. This can though.

 

And for the record, I never said 73 was bad. All I pointed out was that it wasn't the 90 that it was posited as.

[mrewmrew]

Mac healthsci has a highschool entrance average within 3% of UWO biomed and 1-2% of mcgill life sci. Neither of these programs have such a large proportion of their students with A/A+ averages (not even close). What justification is there for this practice at mac health sci?

 

I posted this question on another mac health sci thread and the responses I got were that mac health sci students are stronger students who are better at critical thinking.

 

I actually think group work/projects can potentially be very rigorous/frustrating/challenging and I don't doubt the rigours of the program... but I really want to know why that one tiny program pumps out such a ridiculous proportion of 3.9+ every year.

[designed]

Mac healthsci has a highschool entrance average within 3% of UWO biomed and 1-2% of mcgill life sci. Neither of these programs have such a large proportion of their students with A/A+ averages (not even close).

 

Just curious -- do you have a source for the average grade that students get in UWO Biomed and Mcgill Life sci?

[mrewmrew]

Just curious -- do you have a source for the average grade that students get in UWO Biomed and Mcgill Life sci?

 

I only have sources for highschool entrance averages. But the average grade for university programs can be estimated relatively accurately by looking at class averages of courses, as well as % breakdowns for exams (% with A+, %A... etc.) I personally attend UWO, haha. I have quite a few friends who went/are going to mcgill life sci and their dream would come true if they could cruise around with 80+ class averages for their courses.

[Falling]

jeez 80%+ averages for final course grades?

 

I have at least 5 math courses on my transcript that had final class averages that are Ds.

[meganjoa]

jeez 80%+ averages for final course grades?

 

I have at least 5 math courses on my transcript that had final class averages that are Ds.

 

I dont think math vs science courses is a fair comparison; Traditionally, most math courses have a lower class avg...besides, I am not sure why you would even elect to take 5 math courses in the first place

[Falling]

I dont think math vs science courses is a fair comparison; Traditionally, most math courses have a lower class avg...besides, I am not sure why you would even elect to take 5 math courses in the first place

 

I was just pointing out how incredibly high some of the class averages being thrown around in this thread are, relative to other programs.

 

I did my first undergraduate degree in mathematics.

[meganjoa]

Mac healthsci has a highschool entrance average within 3% of UWO biomed and 1-2% of mcgill life sci. Neither of these programs have such a large proportion of their students with A/A+ averages (not even close). What justification is there for this practice at mac health sci?

 

I posted this question on another mac health sci thread and the responses I got were that mac health sci students are stronger students who are better at critical thinking.

 

I actually think group work/projects can potentially be very rigorous/frustrating/challenging and I don't doubt the rigours of the program... but I really want to know why that one tiny program pumps out such a ridiculous proportion of 3.9+ every year.

 

there could be many different reasons why this might be the case...the mac health sci program has a much closer knit community than traditional undergrad programs (because of its emphasis on collaboration), thus more hth sci students are inclined to share resources, engage in group studying, ask peers questions (about concepts they dont understand).etc, this leads to greater motivation, and thus produces students of higher calibre (i.e. high class average) in comparison to traditional programs such as mcgill life sci, where there is less of a sense of community, larger classes, not as much collaboration, and more independent studying on the contrary.

[mountainaxe46]

It's the grade inflation that bothers many. The program maintains an A- average in its courses. As such, there's no way to distinguish a good student in the program vs. less ideal candidate.

 

It doen'st necessarily mean the students are undeserving, but their path to medicine is far more realistic than most schools

[TheManwithNoName]

the exam was given 2 months in advance this year. everyone got 90% on it.[/QUOTE]

 

 

 

And to the individuals who are shocked to hear health scis don't know what a kinase is....ever thought to verify the information first instead of just gasping and appearing scandalized?

 

Can't really verify IRL. No one from my HS got into Health Sci. I don't really believe it tbh, since kinases are talked about in physiology classes. Note: I haven't said anything about Health Sci being easier or harder, I don't know enough about the program to make a judgement. Maybe if I get into Med and meet a Health Sci (seems likely), I can talk about the program at length.

[Heisenberg_]

Grade inflation is the problem. 

[futurefamilydoc]

there could be many different reasons why this might be the case...the mac health sci program has a much closer knit community than traditional undergrad programs (because of its emphasis on collaboration), thus more hth sci students are inclined to share resources, engage in group studying, ask peers questions (about concepts they dont understand).etc, this leads to greater motivation, and thus produces students of higher calibre (i.e. high class average) in comparison to traditional programs such as mcgill life sci, where there is less of a sense of community, larger classes, not as much collaboration, and more independent studying on the contrary.

 

I would have to disagree somewhat on what you said about McGill. The "life sci" program is basically just first year, after that people are broken up into their respective majors (anatomy, physiology, immunology, etc.), so you find yourself in relatively smaller groups so there is a sense of community. Most of courses themselves may not emphasize collaboration, but virtually every course I took there were multiple people willing to set up and take part in group study, note sharing, and answering peer questions via our online discussion boards. Yes our courses are more memorization based, but medicine itself requires a great deal of memorization so I see it as good preparation.

[mrewmrew]

I would have to disagree somewhat on what you said about McGill. The "life sci" program is basically just first year, after that people are broken up into their respective majors (anatomy, physiology, immunology, etc.), so you find yourself in relatively smaller groups so there is a sense of community. Most of courses themselves may not emphasize collaboration, but virtually every course I took there were multiple people willing to set up and take part in group study, note sharing, and answering peer questions via our online discussion boards. Yes our courses are more memorization based, but medicine itself requires a great deal of memorization so I see it as good preparation.

 

Yes, the same goes for UWO biomed. There is a facebook page for each biomed year with around two thousand members. People post all sorts of materials: notes, past exams, lecture recordings etc. If you posted a question about some lecture concept, you'd get really quick answers from a bunch of people. For some questions you'd get upwards of 80 people commenting on it. UWO biomed is also split into much smaller modules after 2nd year. The amount of collaboration between students here (and I'm sure the same goes for other traditional life sci programs) is actually pretty outstanding.

[peace2012]

Even without inflation, Health scis get a lot of opportunities that might seem unfair such as Learnlink folders that have all the past tests for a lot of commonly enrolled courses that are not available to anyone else, research opportunities (especially clinical research) advertised to them through learnlink, health sci scholarships, etc... , profs are more willing to write ref letters, a lot of opportunities to get involved in clubs, ECs through the support of the program, get to have cadaver labs, simulated patients interviews, the list goes on and on and on...

[meganjoa]

Even without inflation, Health scis get a lot of opportunities that might seem unfair such as Learnlink folders that have all the past tests for a lot of commonly enrolled courses that are not available to anyone else, research opportunities (especially clinical research) advertised to them through learnlink, health sci scholarships, etc... , profs are more willing to write ref letters, a lot of opportunities to get involved in clubs, ECs through the support of the program, get to have cadaver labs, simulated patients interviews, the list goes on and on and on...

 

I dont see how this is unfair...if anything, it just goes to show that the health sci faculty is much more supportive of their students...I mean, other undergrad programs also have the liberty to provide these opportunities to these students, but they choose not to (i.e. create their own 'learnlink', share resources, advertise research opportunties, profs can opt to write ref letters for their students.etc)