*sigh* why do I even bother.
Believe what you want. I don't care.

Originally Posted by hellohello

*sigh* why do I even bother.
Believe what you want. I don't care.

The fact that you don't see a valid point in anything anyone else has said here really makes me question your critical thinking skills, but who am I to talk, everyone knows that the vast majority of kids in mac that are intelligent and driven are in HSc, the fact that they make up 70% of the provost list should be more than enough to prove that.

Originally Posted by plums

everyone needs to stop fooling themselves....

health sci courses are EASY.
humanities/soc sci courses have a medium difficulty level.
science courses are hard.....much harder than soc sci/humanities courses.

Everyone who says differently is in denial and wants to make themselves feel better.

THE END.

Well, personally I find healthsci courses like cellbio and psychobio by far the hardest and most time consuming, compared to courses like chem and calc which I spend the least time on but get the highest marks. For cellbio on the first assessment most people got 60-70s. I heard from last year that the average was a 10 meaning a good amount of people didn't get As in the course.

"For cellbio on the first assessment most people got 60-70s. I heard from last year that the average was a 10 meaning a good amount of people didn't get As in the course."

Really? I haven't had anything in Life Science yet where the average was as high as a 70. Including that awesome physics midterm with like a 30% average.

Though the average doesn't really count, because it's true that Health Science AVERAGES should be higher (less people, generally a group of people who achieved relatively high marks in high school). Besides, half the time there are people who get like 40s screwing up the average, and so it's not hard to get 20 or 30% above average.

Originally Posted by plums

everyone needs to stop fooling themselves....

health sci courses are EASY.
humanities/soc sci courses have a medium difficulty level.
science courses are hard.....much harder than soc sci/humanities courses.

Everyone who says differently is in denial and wants to make themselves feel better.

THE END.

I completely disagree, and I've said this before.

I do not know anyone who has received a 12 in an English, Cultural Studies or Comparative Lit Class. I know two people who have gotten 11s, one I know for sure was in one of the first year classes.

Most English/CSCT/Comp Lit students with "good" grades (myself being one) get 9s and 10s, myself being one of those. The averages in our classes are around 65%-70%. So yeah, you may pass, but it's hard to do well.

I've also noticed a huge difference how our essays are marked when compared to a Soc Sci paper: we get nailed if our style and grammar is bad, whereas in Soc Sci papers it's more about the argument. I have read some papers with cringe-worthy grammar mistakes still getting in the high B range...that doesn't happen in English.

thread forwarded to medschools

health scis busting out House references, science students loathing in jealousy, and firedragoonx taking a health sci course bc he heard it was a bird course, then complaining about it. such an awesome thread.

oh and the cream cheese on my bologna sandwich, the attempt at coolness through the use of beer animations in signatures

Originally Posted by bumblin

health scis busting out House references,

where?

Originally Posted by bumblin

and firedragoonx taking a health sci course bc he heard it was a bird course, then complaining about it. such an awesome thread.

wut
It was a bird course. I'm not complaining about it, I was saying how easy it was and I said it was probably how difficult all health sci courses really are.

Originally Posted by bumblin

oh and the cream cheese on my bologna sandwich, the attempt at coolness through the use of beer animations in signatures

u mad?
and what I put in my sig shouldn't affect how you perceive me and my posts.

And you coming on here and commenting on how "awesome" this thread is your lame attempt at being cool. try harder next time.

lol flame war? The funniest part of it is the trolls going at it. Posts bashing other faculties are old and lame.

I don't have to try to be cool, I have an iPhone

Originally Posted by Nino

lol flame war? The funniest part of it is the trolls going at it. Posts bashing other faculties are old and lame.

It can't be helped when Faculty day pretty much ingrains in your head that your faculty is the best.

It's all relative.

Originally Posted by Tailsnake

I understand where the logic behind your view comes from, but, quite frankly, it's wrong.

The average to get into HSc the year before I came to mac was about a 91% the average lifesci student next year is expected to need a 87% to get in, ArtSci requires about an 89% average to get in ISci requires 90+%. The largest difference between any of those averages is about 4% (2% if you don't even take LifeSci into consideration) and it's been shown that there is only a weak correlation between high school marks and university marks. So a population of students with what amounts to essentially the same mark (a <4% difference is almost nothing, especially when taking the correlation into consideration) are performing similarly in university except for a specific group of them. When it comes down to it, there's almost no difference between the marks and application required to get into ArtSci, ISci, and HSc, yet only HSc as a population are doing disproportionately well in University. In that case the simplest and most logical conclusion is either that their courses are easier or that their marks are inflated.

WHA..!?
Where did you get the information that "the average to get into HSc the year before I came to mac was about a 91% " from?
Now, I agree that HS marks don't mean that much, but seriously, 91% average? ROFLMAO

Most people consider the median to be better measure than the average anyway. In your year the median was 95% and I'm reasonably sure that in the year before yours, two thirds of HeatlScis had 95% or higher.

Like I said before, if you haven't taken health sci, humanities, soc sci courses, your opinion shouldn't count.

I took a health sci course this year and 10% of my mark was a joke. During the tutorial, the TA pretty much said "for this assignment take everything I wrote on the board and put it into paragraphs". No thinking required really. Plus, it was complete/incomplete.

Also, they told us the first day of lecture that 50% of the class gets an A- or higher.

It's harder to do well in Social Sciences/Humanities because of the subjective nature of the courses. When I took a philosophy course if you wanted an A it had to be publication quality. For my Comp Lit course, a "75" on an essay was considered a good mark. SociSci/Humanities students tend to have more free time that Engineering or science students because the coursework is different. My lowest mark is a humanities course =p.

Okay, I need to weigh in.

First off, the notion that Health Science is any easier that other programs is incorrect. What the BHSc program has done is take in students who have demonstrated a certain caliber of work ethic and drive and molded them into excellent candidates for professional programs in medicine.

This is a very intelligent thing to do, and is an excellent marketing tool for the Mac Medical school. The Mac Health Sciences program has a nation-wide reputation as being one of the (if not the) most competitive Undergraduate science program to get into (an analogue being getting into the Ivey HBA program out of HS). They use this reputation to attract the best candidates: people who have extremely high averages in high school PLUS an extensive list of extracurricular and leadership involvement.

This creates a program where a lot of the students are overachievers and have taken the time in high school to perfect their time management and organization. To this day I can honestly say that Health Science students on average are more organized than students of any other faculty.

Now. This doesn't mean I think the average Health Science student is more intelligent than the average student in other faculties. I just mean to say that they tend to be more mature, and more goal oriented because they have decided what they want to do in life and will drive forward with no hesitation.

On the other hand, what I have seen in the Arts faculties are students who are extremely intelligent but lack the desire to confine to programs as regimented as Health Science. I for one have close to no idea what I want to do when I graduate, but I do know that I do not want to be a physician.

It's what sets me apart from a Health Science student. I want to explore the world, and find the thing that I am naturally the best at. I'm not particularly interested at working my hardest towards something I may never be great at, but I sure as hell love finding out my strengths.

I came out of high school terribly disorganized, although I was extremely efficient. However, I found myself rewriting papers the morning it was due, or being unable to stick to a proper topic. My mind wanders, and I love it because it helps me come up with new ideas for other things. The side effect of this is that I am still in University, 5 years after graduating high school, and I don't particularly want to leave.

--

To conclude, no. Health Science isn't any easier. It merely caters to a specific type of person, and a person who fits the mold will prosper in the program. The people who find HSci easy generally do so because it is a program that is built to fit them.

Engineering is terribly more difficult either. The people who find it very tough are generally those who don't belong in engineering. The people who I find are the best engineers have a certain level of creativity that allows them to respect and enjoy the arts. The idiots on DC++ talking about how Humanities isn't a real program aren't exactly set out to prosper in life.

The fact of that matter is, people will always find the things they are good at, to be easy. We are all wired differently, and some of us have chosen to go into programs that may require much harder work because we aren't wired with as much compatibility to a program than a peer.

Regardless of all of this, we don't need to argue about what is easier or what is harder. This is stupid and all it does is cause unnecessary strife.

..but we can all hate on Art Scis because they are good at everything.. and nothing... all at the same time.