Originally Posted by gregster

Still around 6 courses a term but you have commerce courses as well, which are typically easier than the engineering ones.

man if in high school u do 4 courses and grade 12 some times 3 per semester how am I gona survice 6 uni courses

Originally Posted by mfattal

man if in high school u do 4 courses and grade 12 some times 3 per semester how am I gona survice 6 uni courses

By studying efficiently. The faster you learn to do so, the easier it gets. Sure you can pull off a 12 studying 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. But its also do able by studying half that time if done properly.

Originally Posted by mfattal

man if in high school u do 4 courses and grade 12 some times 3 per semester how am I gona survice 6 uni courses

Summer courses, and drop your 6th course if you know you're going to fail it and its not a prereq. Materials (1m03) or engineering design(1c03?) are two you can do this with... I wish I did this.

Even if you do well, all that really matters is that you develop an effective study style throughout the year, which will make subsequent years easier.

Originally Posted by BlakeM

In general, I find we have less stress and have more time to understand difficult concepts. This is mainly because every management student I know finds the management stuff easier than the engineering courses. You end up getting equivalent work of straight engineering, but a bunch of it is easy work, and my semesters with many management courses end up being jokes.

I wish I was smart enough after first year to be in MGMT with you :(

Originally Posted by KYLB0T

I wish I was smart enough after first year to be in MGMT with you :(

still time to shadow us and be one with the management brah

Yea its really unfortunate. Not only does this happen in engineering but it also happens in every other faculty. I guess the best thing you can do is try your best to focus on your own learning, passions regardless of what other people do. That is the only thing you have control over, so why worry about anyone else? I know its hard to think that cheaters and people who don't work hard will potentially be competing with you, and may be taking a spot in a future employment BUT in the end, those who are passionate will make the greatest mark. In the real world, those people who cheated will not be able to survive.

Not to go all hippie on you guys, but a degree or diploma is no more than a piece of toilet paper. It used to represent knowledge, or credibility in a certain field, but the system has decayed, and now every Tom, Dick and Harry have a bachelors because of increased enrollment.

What do you learn in university? The system has transformed in such a way that ultimately what you learn is how to play the game. I've been a TA for 5 semesters, and what do you think the most frequently asked question is?

You might think it's something mathy (since I'm in the dept. of Math and Stats), or somehow related to course material. Perhaps "How do you do problem ____?" but no. The question most frequently asked by all university student is: Will this be on the exam? Students ask this question as if they'll have some kind of allergic reaction to learning too much course material. If you're taking a subject because you want to learn and enjoy it, you'll not only avoid asking this question, but you'll also try to learn more than simply the material on the exam.

The average university graduate has learned how to study efficiently. They simply predict what sorts of questions will be on the exam and study no more than those. In fact, one of the stupidest people I know is on the Provost Honour Roll (he has a straight 12 average). He's a fantastic test writer and frequently gets perfect, but if you ask him about anything in the course he can't explain it, or even apply it, 5 minutes after the test.

At my convocation, I was convinced that at least half the graduates were complete morons that fell into this category. Maybe I'm a pessimist.

Originally Posted by Mowicz

The average university graduate has learned how to study efficiently. They simply predict what sorts of questions will be on the exam and study no more than those. In fact, one of the stupidest people I know is on the Provost Honour Roll (he has a straight 12 average). He's a fantastic test writer and frequently gets perfect, but if you ask him about anything in the course he can't explain it, or even apply it, 5 minutes after the test.

At my convocation, I was convinced that at least half the graduates were complete morons that fell into this category. Maybe I'm a pessimist.

You make a good point. However, I think studying efficiently is not a bad thing mainly due to the fact that it's nearly impossible to do well in all courses when taking 5+ courses per semester with all the assignments, labs, papers, etc. But there is a difference in studying efficiently and knowing the material versus simply cramming 48 hours prior to an assessment.

However, it eventually comes down to the fact that a 12 average will only get someone so far if they are simply good test takers. The real world doesn't have tests, and if all you take from university is simply memorizing and good test taking skills, well then the real world will eat those up.

Originally Posted by pavlov

You make a good point. However, I think studying efficiently is not a bad thing mainly due to the fact that it's nearly impossible to do well in all courses when taking 5+ courses per semester with all the assignments, labs, papers, etc. But there is a difference in studying efficiently and knowing the material versus simply cramming 48 hours prior to an assessment.

While 'efficiently' sounds like a positive word, in this case it's analogous to "cutting corners."

I'll calculate this for a typical 5 course semester:

In a week, there are 168 hours. Subtract a good night's sleep each night (over-estimating the 8 hour per night guideline) and you have roughly 100 hours. Subtract 15 hours per week for lecture hours, 6 per week for labs/tutorials, and 4 for anything else that might come up (commuting, etc)...there are still 75 hours, across 7 days, which I will refer to as "spare time."

This is divided into "study time" + "leisure time" + "wasted time." I don't know about you, but I could write 5 terms papers in 75 hours (assuming I've kept up with the course material), or study for 5 courses, etc...if it came down to it. Now I certainly couldn't sustain this from week to week without going crazy, but that's plenty of time to study if you needed it (such as now, during exam season).

My point is, time isn't as big of a factor as people think it is. I'm not going to lie and say I'm a perfect student, I would spend very little of my time studying (in the grand scheme of things) but I made it a policy to never ask if something would be on the test. When in doubt, I would study it...this is contrary to most university students I come into contact with. Many will email their professors and ask what will be on there, or if a certain topic is omitted.

The problem is that most people don't use this time wisely. Instead of spending half (or more) of their spare time studying (which it's well documented that even 10, 15 years ago students spent twice or even three times the amount of time studying), they cut it down to a very small fraction. Maybe they'll study 8 hours a week...or even 4. The fewer the better, for whatever reason. In fact, the average student wastes so much time that it not only cuts into their study time, but even into their sleeping time (which you'll note, I've allocated first).

How many times have you heard "I got (whatever mark) and I ONLY studied (small amount of time)!" like it's some sort of feat of strength? Every time you hear this, it's a bad thing.

However, it eventually comes down to the fact that a 12 average will only get someone so far if they are simply good test takers. The real world doesn't have tests, and if all you take from university is simply memorizing and good test taking skills, well then the real world will eat those up.

In a perfect world this would be true, but consider for example, med school. Anyone with a straight 12 average has written their own ticket into med school. Whether these guys make great doctors or terrible ones, they're still doctors and will be employed.

This is the case for most professional schools, academia, etc. Anything that has job security.

society has come to the point where your degree is simply just a credential that allows employers to choose better. so i would argue that - yes, as wrong and immoral as cheating is, it can still be beneficial.

with that said, however, the quote "you can run on charm for 15 minutes, but after that, you better know something" is still incredibly applicable. so in the circumstance you do end up going into engineering with your engineering degree (going into a field related to your degree isnt always a given) then of course, you would have to know [to some degree] what youre doing.

generally, jobs require more training post-degree - but in the field of engineering, like others, youre screwed if you cheated your way there.

Originally Posted by AlexBatt

generally, jobs require more training post-degree - but in the field of engineering, like others, youre screwed if you cheated your way there.

Anything with a job interview (as engineers frequently have I believe, or many business or tech positions) you won't be any better off, particularly because they don't often check your transcript. I agree with that.

------

Also note that (referring back to my last few posts) I'm not quite referring to "cheating." I don't believe most people cheat in university, they put in (what they feel is) a good honest effort.

I'm simply saying the perception of how much time and effort should go into studying has been skewed...because "as long as I get a good mark, I'm doing fine."

Originally Posted by Mowicz

In a perfect world this would be true, but consider for example, med school. Anyone with a straight 12 average has written their own ticket into med school. Whether these guys make great doctors or terrible ones, they're still doctors and will be employed.

This is the case for most professional schools, academia, etc. Anything that has job security.

Not entirely true. Grades will get your foot in the door (aka an interview) but from there it's you and your experiences/real knowledge that get you in.

Originally Posted by crazyfree

Not entirely true. Grades will get your foot in the door (aka an interview) but from there it's you and your experiences/real knowledge that get you in.

At McMaster's med school anyway. I think that this is how it should work universally, but that sadly isn't true.

Originally Posted by crazyfree

Not entirely true. Grades will get your foot in the door (aka an interview) but from there it's you and your experiences/real knowledge that get you in.

No.

Being able to talk to anybody about anything at any given time is single-handedly the greatest skill we can ever acquire.

Learn how, and you'll be able to get into any place you want.
And after that, it's really hard to fire you!

Originally Posted by lawleypop

No.

Being able to talk to anybody about anything at any given time is single-handedly the greatest skill we can ever acquire.

Learn how, and you'll be able to get into any place you want.
And after that, it's really hard to fire you!

While I didn't say it explicitly, I meant "you can talk" lol. But yeah I agree.