Originally Posted by Linz

Hey RememberTwce,

Would you happen to have the one for 2011 as well that you could post? (Or anyone else who has it?) Thanks!

Sorry, I actually just have this one (had to scan it because I couldn't find it online).

Originally Posted by gggggg

If you think chem is one of the harder courses, then I don't know how you survived physics 1b03, kinesiology or even psych. However, your year is probably different and therefore I think u probably had a much harder prof/year.

I think it's hilarious how you're taking your own personal experience and making that the standard that all other university students should live by.

Originally Posted by MichaelScarn

A fair question, but a question that I doubt any individual on MI can answer accurately, regardless of the numbers being thrown carelessly around.

Right, just like no individual on MI can answer a question about why a particular political situation is as it is, or a particular social situation is as it is. So your solution is "let's just not ask those questions", then? Instead of asking about the Macinsiders' community's input on a particular political issue, one should just email their MP?

I think it was mentioned below that if someone has such a big problem with this, why not email the faculties directly? Most of the comments I'm seeing on this thread are anecdotal and have practically no validity. If someone does care enough to email the faculty, let us know what was said. Much better than posting on a student forum and getting nowhere.

The point of a student forum is for discussion among students. Independently of what the bureaucratic response is (do you actually expect the faculties to give an "unbiased" answer?), it seems worthwhile to discuss a topic that directly pertains to McMaster students on a McMaster student forum. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like anyone's in the mood for that.

Originally Posted by goodnews.inc

If this thread continues to be personally insulting, accusatory or promotes personal attacks that do not contribute to a healthy intellectual discussion/debate, it will be closed.

May as well close the thread, doesn't look like it's going anywhere but downhill.

You think BIO 1M03 is time consuming? You have no idea how time consuming group projects can be.Our meetings for HTH SCI 1I06 went from 15-18 hours each day. Some groups did not allow their members to go back to their rez room to sleep and they made them take "sleep shifts" where half of the group took turns sleeping just so that they got work done 24/7.

Every "LifeSci" course I took was a relief from the madness of HTH SCI. And you don't understand what a blessing exams are. They usually give you a chance to get a mark that you deserve in the course because you worked for it. In HTH SCI courses after pouring your heart and soul into the projects, some facilitator will assign you a mark and you can see the incredible subjectivity that comes into play. For so many of my HTH SCI friends, including me, our lowest marks are in HTH SCI courses.
The only reason I didn't switch into LifeSci this year was because I would be leaving a lot of good friends, otherwise I'd have left a long time ago....

Originally Posted by Aeria

You think BIO 1M03 is time consuming? You have no idea how time consuming group projects can be.Our meetings for HTH SCI 1I06 went from 15-18 hours each day. Some groups did not allow their members to go back to their rez room to sleep and they made them take "sleep shifts" where half of the group took turns sleeping just so that they got work done 24/7.

Every "LifeSci" course I took was a relief from the madness of HTH SCI. And you don't understand what a blessing exams are. They usually give you a chance to get a mark that you deserve in the course because you worked for it. In HTH SCI courses after pouring your heart and soul into the projects, some facilitator will assign you a mark and you can see the incredible subjectivity that comes into play. For so many of my HTH SCI friends, including me, our lowest marks are in HTH SCI courses.
The only reason I didn't switch into LifeSci this year was because I would be leaving a lot of good friends, otherwise I'd have left a long time ago....

Until I read the last line of your post, I was gonna say, if that's what you think then you're in the wrong program, and that has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of either life sci or health sci as programs (to be honest, I'm not particularly fond of either). If your worst marks are those courses in your program, the courses/topics that your degree says you know well, then you're probably in the wrong program.

I hate group projects, but I do find they always bring my mark up, relative to tests and exams. Again, depends what kind of learner you are. I suck at remembering things. My program has a midterm, exam and at least one group project in nearly every course, which I suppose is a decent mix, although it is a ton of work having all of them together. And again, my electives are consistently my lowest marks. You could look at that and say that I'm stupid and should learn to pick better electives (which maybe is true), but I pick things I'm interested in, though not interested in enough to major in, and I end up enjoying myself.

Originally Posted by Aeria

You think BIO 1M03 is time consuming? You have no idea how time consuming group projects can be.Our meetings for HTH SCI 1I06 went from 15-18 hours each day. Some groups did not allow their members to go back to their rez room to sleep and they made them take "sleep shifts" where half of the group took turns sleeping just so that they got work done 24/7.

Every "LifeSci" course I took was a relief from the madness of HTH SCI. And you don't understand what a blessing exams are. They usually give you a chance to get a mark that you deserve in the course because you worked for it. In HTH SCI courses after pouring your heart and soul into the projects, some facilitator will assign you a mark and you can see the incredible subjectivity that comes into play. For so many of my HTH SCI friends, including me, our lowest marks are in HTH SCI courses.
The only reason I didn't switch into LifeSci this year was because I would be leaving a lot of good friends, otherwise I'd have left a long time ago....

Definitely agree. We had all nighters in my group meetings. The people in our program is one that goes above and beyond in everything that we do. My electives were a HUGE reprieve from all the group meetings, the group essays, the group projects in health sci. You have no idea how easy it is to straight up memorize, or even do practice questions... I got all 12s in my electives and chem, and my only non-12 was psychobiology, a health sci course where you have to write weekly journals and group essays. SURE... there was no exam, but that doesn't mean it wasn't difficult. Marking was SO subjective, so all you can do is try your best (and I mean, REALLY try your best).

Edit: And to add, all the hard work that we do has also provided me with an amazing first year. Sure, work was hard, and there were definitely up's and down's, but in health sci, you're IN THIS TOGETHER. Staying up 'til 4 am editting that group essay? So is the rest of your group members. It may seem like Health Sci is a lot of hard work, but I honestly think it's worth it. This is cliche, but I honestly believe that you have to put in the work to reap the benefits. I would not change this for anything.

Technically, everything in OPs post is wrong so here goes, (though I do agree completely with Mahratta's posts so far - leave it to the math and stats guy to be the voice of reason).

1. In January, they reward even more senate scholarships than your PDF thing shows. I know they gave it to at least some people with 11.6 last year at this time, so it would be a higher percent than OP estimated 26% of non-graduating students. Maybe like 30-33%? I don't think they publish the updated numbers afaik. It's nice that the University offers these awards separated by faculty in the first place (rather than overall in the university), otherwise like 80% of BHSc would get one.

2. You don't have evidence for the not-beating-the curve-in-other-courses-to-the-same-extent thing. My own transcript goes completely against that, but a sample of n=1 doesn't prove anything either so sorry for the anecdote.

3. I guess 95% is sorta kinda impressive. Maybe try finding another program with people all with that high HS averages and see what their university GPAs are like. I think iSci had a much higher % of people getting 12.0 in 2010-2011 than health scis or life scis... No one would ever say their program is bird LOL. Many Ivy League schools are also 'suspected' of massive grade inflation. So maybe OP wouldn't trust anyone from those schools to be their physician either cuz they were only smart in high school? I know they wrote that just to be forceful, but it really doesn't make sense considering if anyone were that dumb they would not graduate the MD program.

4. I think it's better to judge people by the content of their character than turning them into a statistic. But obviously it's your choice who you want in charge of your health care!

5. In regards to why small programs are different than larger ones, I find it odd that people always jump to the conclusion that the small programs are the 'problem', I think it's the opposite. The large programs are the problem. I think inquiry / group work prepares you better for the workforce than sitting in 3 hours of lectures per week and writing 2 midterms and an exam. If a byproduct is higher grades because the classes are smaller, more tight-knit, people are more engaged and the professors care more, then any 'distinction' would go away and we'd all be equal again. I don't think grades mean much (within reason of course). Health sci students mostly love their program and faculty, and to be frank I have no idea why there aren't more programs like it at other universities so that everyone who wanted a similar opportunity could have it.

I wish we could all get along as if there were no Health vs Life Sci... I wish I could bake a cake filled with rainbows and smiles and everyone would eat and be happy...

But imho, there should have just been one general science program, no segregation = no problems.

Originally Posted by Christ

I wish we could all get along as if there were no Health vs Life Sci... I wish I could bake a cake filled with rainbows and smiles and everyone would eat and be happy...

But imho, there should have just been one general science program, no segregation = no problems.

Ehh this topic isn't meant to be life sci vs health sci at all. Only two people are kind of going at it about that kind of.

Originally Posted by Mahratta

Right, just like no individual on MI can answer a question about why a particular political situation is as it is, or a particular social situation is as it is. So your solution is "let's just not ask those questions", then? Instead of asking about the Macinsiders' community's input on a particular political issue, one should just email their MP?

At what point did I say "let's just not ask those questions"? And what sort of "input" has the Macinsiders community given so far?

Originally Posted by Mahratta

The point of a student forum is for discussion among students. Independently of what the bureaucratic response is (do you actually expect the faculties to give an "unbiased" answer?), it seems worthwhile to discuss a topic that directly pertains to McMaster students on a McMaster student forum. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem like anyone's in the mood for that.

I have no qualms with discussion among students, but not one that ends in arguments with no real points being presented. I don't expect the faculties to give an unbiased answer, but definitely an answer that's much more factually based than the ones seen here. Most of the people commenting have only experienced one side of this argument and thus are arguing based on hearsay.

Originally Posted by MichaelScarn

I think it's hilarious how you're taking your own personal experience and making that the standard that all other university students should live by.

Again, I did the past exams/tests for both 1M03 and chemistry and I can tell you that chem definitely got easier for my year (maybe my personal opinion, but I dont find it hilarious and I did not make that a "standard" that all other university students should live by), therefore I am actually kind of supporting health sci on this one since you guys said chem was one of the harder courses. (btw chem curriculum changed also, and that is for sure)
Biology 1M03 is undoubtfully the hardest course I have taken in my university career (surpasses physics, math, chem, kine, psych, etc...). It is NOT just memorizing, because the questions on the tests were very specific. It is my personal opinion, however, a majority of the first year life sci students who took 1m03 with evans will agree with me that this course is indeed very difficult and the group PBL is marked very hard. I'm sorry that if I offended anyone, however, this is my opinion and I believe most of the mcmaster students will agree that health sci kids are treated more superior and better by the administration.

Originally Posted by gggggg

Again, I did the past exams/tests for both 1M03 and chemistry and I can tell you that chem definitely got easier for my year (maybe my personal opinion, but I dont find it hilarious and I did not make that a "standard" that all other university students should live by), therefore I am actually kind of supporting health sci on this one since you guys said chem was one of the harder courses. (btw chem curriculum changed also, and that is for sure)
Biology 1M03 is undoubtfully the hardest course I have taken in my university career (surpasses physics, math, chem, kine, psych, etc...). It is NOT just memorizing, because the questions on the tests were very specific. It is my personal opinion, however, a majority of the first year life sci students who took 1m03 with evans will agree with me that this course is indeed very difficult and the group PBL is marked very hard. I'm sorry that if I offended anyone, however, this is my opinion and I believe most of the mcmaster students will agree that health sci kids are treated more superior and better by the administration.

I found our chem exam (this year) to be harder than the previous exams they gave us. Bio 1M03 was undoubtedly harder for us this time around though (second term) due to Evans.

Originally Posted by gggggg

unlike health sci PBL where there is a clear rubric or standard. I'm sorry that if I offended anyone, however, this is my opinion and I believe most of the mcmaster students will agree that health sci kids are treated more superior and better by the administration.

Wow, that is the exact opposite of what goes on. You ask a TA what they are looking for in HTH SCI and they'll tell you "Whatever you feel is best for your learning", you get you assignment/essay/project back and you're just devastated over the grade because they'll never share the secret rubric in their head. Its too "LifeSci" to do something like being fair and sharing your expectations for the course and making a marking scheme public. Like I said before, profs in LifeSci courses are so incredibly fair and reasonable compared to what goes on in HTH SCI.

Originally Posted by gggggg

I believe most of the mcmaster students will agree that health sci kids are treated more superior and better by the administration.

Any evidence or sources that you have that can back up your statement?

Originally Posted by yoni

5. In regards to why small programs are different than larger ones, I find it odd that people always jump to the conclusion that the small programs are the 'problem', I think it's the opposite. The large programs are the problem. I think inquiry / group work prepares you better for the workforce than sitting in 3 hours of lectures per week and writing 2 midterms and an exam. If a byproduct is higher grades because the classes are smaller, more tight-knit, people are more engaged and the professors care more, then any 'distinction' would go away and we'd all be equal again. I don't think grades mean much (within reason of course). Health sci students mostly love their program and faculty, and to be frank I have no idea why there aren't more programs like it at other universities so that everyone who wanted a similar opportunity could have it.

I've never seen anyone jump to the conclusion that a smaller program is the problem. I come from a small program, much smaller than hth sci, and that's one of the major advantages of the program. It's a selling point, something that draws people towards the program and something that the students in it tend to point out as one of the first good things about it.

My earlier point about smaller program size was that normal distributions of marks are less common with less people in a program...but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Even mathematically, that makes sense--you can flip a coin ten times and get 9 heads, even though statistically you would expect 5. But if you flip the coin enough times, you'll eventually get closer and closer to the expected statistic.

Also...this isn't directed at any person in particular, but there are a few health scis on here defending their program, which is fine. But they don't speak for all health scis. There are definitely people in health sci who agree with a lot of the posts about lack of work ethic and all that. Just because someone is in health sci, doesn't mean they speak for everyone in the program. People should keep that in mind when discussing/attacking their views.

Originally Posted by nerual

. Just because someone is in health sci, doesn't mean they speak for everyone in the program.

Fair point, but people also have to keep in mind that just because you've talked to or seen a few health scis do some things, doesn't mean you know the entire program.