Originally Posted by daniella13

Wow thanks! That's makes a ton of sense I'm glad you've filled me in (I have a feeling I'm gonna be paying many trips to the Advising Office haha).
Let's say you want to do two majors...say History and English; would I have to do 2 classes in each first year?

Good choice- that's what I'm doing! haha Yes, you will need two first year English classes that combined make an average of 7 or more (so you're ofine if you get a 6 in one, and say a 9 in the other, or two 7s, but always aim high!) and the same for history, two classes with a combined average of 7. A class that last one semester (most classes) gets you three credits, while a class that runs two semesters will get you six credits (such as first year political science). But your cumulative average over your 10 first year classes must be a 6 for you to get into the upper year (upper year is second year up) history and english programs. You must have 30 credits to pass a year.

Originally Posted by lizziepizzie

In eng., isn't the answer concrete> As in, no matter what it's always the same answer for a particular question. In English (humanities) it's all completely subjective on who reads your work, becasue it's not about what's right or wrong, it's your take on it and how you express it. It's all about writing style just as equally as it is about the content.

Yep. I didn't say the same for some science programs, though (particularly math & physics, and particularly in upper years), since more than one answer is possible (maybe not in physics, actually), & the argument is what's important - something like you'd get in humanities courses. Engineering, on the other hand, is meant to be concrete - and parts of it that aren't concrete are successively approximated until they are.

Originally Posted by AelyaS

For the most part, it's easy to pass Humanities courses, but doing well is a different story. Damn you, subjective T.A's. Damn you.

In the humanities, they kind of curve 'passively'. That is to say, every mark you get is curved, since the marker can compare your work with the work of others and set a standard based on class performance. While the marker may have an ideal of what an A, B, or C paper is beforehand, that changes as they actually start grading, & people are more-or-less slotted in to a spot on the curve

I remember that when i was accepted for Social Sciences at McMaster the average needed was 76%. I got my acceptance part-way through March, i look forward to meeting you in the fall

Originally Posted by Mahratta

In the humanities, they kind of curve 'passively'. That is to say, every mark you get is curved, since the marker can compare your work with the work of others and set a standard based on class performance. While the marker may have an ideal of what an A, B, or C paper is beforehand, that changes as they actually start grading, & people are more-or-less slotted in to a spot on the curve

Tell this to my Religion T.A, who has his own standards for everything. gah.

Originally Posted by daniella13

And I will have to be on res haha, I can't commute it's much too far
Yeah, I've heard positive things about Humanities/Social Sci at Mac!
I feel like sciency people look down on us :S Is there that kind of atmosphere at Mac?

From what I understand the faculty debate goes on at every campus. Fun fun!

Originally Posted by Allana:)

I was accepted in February with about 95.

so your smart enough to get a 95 but too dumb to use it to get into a more renowned program (not saying mac sucks, but w/ 95 you can go places...)

liar mcliarson.

Originally Posted by Allana:)

I was accepted in February with about 95.

You are either:

1. Bullshitting
2. Retarded

Or...

Your school is:

1. Full of retards


Who in the right mind with a 95% average would apply for socsci/humanities?


Gtfo, please.

Originally Posted by Desda

awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Are you implying people who go into humanities/soc sci can't be smart? Barack Obama did his undergrad in political science (a branch of social sciences), Both Donald Trump and Warren Buffet did their undergrads in Economics (also a branch of social sciences).

Ever heard of The Nobel Prize in Economics? I'm pretty sure some of those folks could have graduated with 95% averages...

There are incredibly intelligent people in every field of academia.

Originally Posted by Desda

You are either:

1. Bullshitting
2. Retarded

Or...

Your school is:

1. Full of retards


Who in the right mind with a 95% average would apply for socsci/humanities?


Gtfo, please.

Originally Posted by J-Met

Are you implying people who go into humanities/soc sci can't be smart? Barack Obama did his undergrad in political science (a branch of social sciences), Both Donald Trump and Warren Buffet did their undergrads in Economics (also a branch of social sciences).

Ever heard of The Nobel Prize in Economics? I'm pretty sure some of those folks could have graduated with 95% averages...

There are incredibly intelligent people in every field of academia.

Desda just got owned.

Originally Posted by J-Met

Are you implying people who go into humanities/soc sci can't be smart? Barack Obama did his undergrad in political science (a branch of social sciences), Both Donald Trump and Warren Buffet did their undergrads in Economics (also a branch of social sciences).

Ever heard of The Nobel Prize in Economics? I'm pretty sure some of those folks could have graduated with 95% averages...

There are incredibly intelligent people in every field of academia.

yea people need to stop bashing other faculties, it's getting boring...

Originally Posted by J-Met

Are you implying people who go into humanities/soc sci can't be smart? Barack Obama did his undergrad in political science (a branch of social sciences), Both Donald Trump and Warren Buffet did their undergrads in Economics (also a branch of social sciences).

Ever heard of The Nobel Prize in Economics? I'm pretty sure some of those folks could have graduated with 95% averages...

There are incredibly intelligent people in every field of academia.

I completely overlooked the fact that there are exceptions to everything, my bad.

But what you listed is relatively uncommon and most people go for programs that have a higher guarantee of a high income job after graduation.

Most people in socsci/humanities are still dumb as shit. Why do you think they have the lowest acceptance average throughout most, if not all, schools?

This girl actually wants to start the biggest debate here and i honestly dont get it. Admission averages are based on the demand for the program. The lower the demand the lower the average. Lets say for example (but will probably never happen) that doctors start being paid less because the govt has no money. If there paid less, less people will be interested in the jobs, therefore less damand and than you universities would hardly get any students applying to the medical program so they would lower the admission average to attract more students. In other words if you STILL DONT GET IT averages are based on demand not "level of brightness". I'm not sure if you will understand this though since youre having a hard time understanding the context of what people are saying

Poor Desda... If you want help applying it, just let me know...

Honestly, all this effing faculty bashing rages me beyond extreme, we all have our strengths and weaknesses. I know I wouldn't be able to handle a nuclear engineering lab, and I'm pretty sure an engineer wouldn't how to effectively preform crisis intervention therapy. In other words:
Can't we all just get along?