Yah right now, I'm in grade 13. I have finished all my science and math courses with really good grades. This would not have been possible if i took all of them at the same time in grade 12.

Plus this year (grade 13), i had time to join extracurricular activites such as cross country running and rugby. Joing these sport teams has really made me into a proper athlete. Now I'm motivated and exicted to join the rowing team for Mcmaster

And on top of that, i have been living without my parents in the second semester. Now i can do alot of stuff without my parents help such as cooking, laundry, cleaning, paying the bills and more. So when i come to Mac in september, i would be prepared both physically and mentally.

Originally Posted by Mowicz

Sorry to barge in unannounced...but I noticed many of you have done the 'victory lap' (as I too did a few years back).

Does anyone else think the removal of grade 13 was a dumb idea? Essentially, everyone who did a victory lap merely did their grade 13...while others chose to bypass it and go to university, at the risk of being ill-prepared.

(Not saying everyone who went without a victory lap was ill-prepared, but I know I couldn't possibly fit all the sciences and maths into grades 11 and 12 without taking a victory lap...so if I did choose to go straight to university, I would have been ill-prepared)

Removing grade 13 was a stupid idea, I agree fully. I did the grade 13 thing, even though it was really grade 12 and I was much more prepared for university; just that time to mature a bit more or something and take more classes.

Originally Posted by feonateresa

Removing grade 13 was a stupid idea, I agree fully. I did the grade 13 thing, even though it was really grade 12 and I was much more prepared for university; just that time to mature a bit more or something and take more classes.

Ya but Ontario was the only place in pretty much all of North America that was had a grade 13...

I don't think it's impossible to fit all the math and sciences into one year. Chemistry, Physics, Biology, Advanced Functions, Calculus and Vectors, Data Management and.... that's it I think. I didn't take grade 12 biology (although I regretted it after a while, since I found the grade 11 one interesting) and I didn't take Data Management because it wasn't needed for any of the programs I applied for.

I think it's good; prepares you for university to have that much stress :p I know a lot of grade 13s who got too used to taking it easy during the victory lap and ended up doing poorly later on when they went on to university. Then again, I guess that really depends on the person and why they're doing a victory lap.

Originally Posted by Ownaginatios

Ya but Ontario was the only place in pretty much all of North America that was had a grade 13...

I don't think it's impossible to fit all the math and sciences into one year. Chemistry, Physics, Biology, Advanced Functions, Calculus and Vectors, Data Management and.... that's it I think. I didn't take grade 12 biology (although I regretted it after a while, since I found the grade 11 one interesting) and I didn't take Data Management because it wasn't needed for any of the programs I applied for.

I think it's good; prepares you for university to have that much stress :p I know a lot of grade 13s who got too used to taking it easy during the victory lap and ended up doing poorly later on when they went on to university. Then again, I guess that really depends on the person and why they're doing a victory lap.

It's far from impossible. This year, I've done Adv. Funct., Calc. & Vect., Physics, Chem, Bio, and English. Nevermind the fact, I was in Gr. 12 this year. Technically not even so, considering I was bumped a grade...

Suffice to say, anything is possible if you set your mind to doing it.

1 - social sciences

2 - living on res, i hope i get what i wannnnnt

3 - really excited!

It's very possible to do all the sciences and math in one year. I think it prepares you a lot more for university than spreading it out in two years. Grade 9 and 10 were a joke. I honestly did nothing during those years, no homework, no studying, nothing. When grade 11 hit and they split science into bio, chem and physics, I found that I had to study to keep my grades up. And when grade 12 hit, the material got harder and I found myself studying harder than anytime in my life. I don't think I would have done so well in the math and sciences in university without that necessary push to get me to study. I believe it's even worse as you go farther into university. Right now I'm staring down 2 orgo, stats, 4bio, 1 biochem and two elective, which are probably going to be physics. If you asked me if I would have taking this course load back in grade 10, I would have said, "are you kidding me?". But I feel confident that I can succeed with the hard work, dedication and work ethics that I have gained through grade 12 and first year uni.

But I do agree that students are going to university too young and that a year would do them good. It would have probably done me good, but I wouldn't want my course load diluted because of that. I would have been bored to death spreading out my grade 12 over 2 years.

All I said was I couldn't possibly fit them all in, because I wasn't in school just to crank out grades like many people...I was there to figure out what I enjoyed. 8 courses per year, occupied by 3 sciences, 3 maths and an english and one elective, doesn't leave much room for exploration.

On the other hand, I took 4 computer courses, 2 electrical, one auto and a refridgeration course thoughout my two years of grade 12 (So I certainly didn't 'become lazy' over that extra year). It allowed me to see if I really wanted a university education, or to become a tradesman...naturally , it's obvious which one I had a better flavour for, being on this forum.

So yeah, it's certainly possible to experience all of the sciences with one year of grade 12, but not all of the sciences and englishes, or sciences and techs. You have to know in advance that science in your area, to get the job done.

Not to mention, they have subsequently removed the most difficult math course (Geometry and Discrete Math), and all notion of proof from the highschool curriculum...that makes it a bit easier to make the jump, since universities no longer expect you to know anything about proof, or Euclidean Geometry in first year. (;

That is very true Mowicz and I never thought about grade 13 being a year where you can explore different subjects to find one that you enjoy. After all, not everyone knows in which general direction they want to venture.

Edit: They removed proofs?!?!?! Like Trig proofs?

Not exactly. (Haha *Math side kicks in*)

Trig proofs aren't 'proofs.' To be precise, they were called "Trig Identities" and they are more like derivations than proofs. You move from one line to the next using certain 'rules' and other identities you take as theorems...these aren't as hard as the 'proofs' I'm referring to (but this is all semantics anyway). These are still in the curriculum (I believe), and they're in Grade 11 U (and possibly M) level math. It's not wrong to call them proofs, because they 'prove' the identites are correct...but I'm referring to a different style of thinking.

The kind of proofs I'm talking about are ones that involve Euclid's Axioms (commonly called "Circle proofs"), and little basic puzzle pieces that you must arrange to solve a larger problem.

You're given some axioms ('things assumed true without proof') like a straight line is 180 degrees, and when you cut it with a second line, the sum of the angles must still be 180 degrees.

You were traditionally given a picture, and a question like "Prove this quadrilateral is cyclic." And you'd have to know the theory, such things as "Every parallelogram is cyclic" and try and prove that your polygon is infact a parallelogram (ie. opposite angles sum to 180, opposite sides are parallel).

This is the kind of stuff I'm referring to...they're not particularly difficult ideas, but they course was tougher than anything in highschool math today because they require you to think on a bit of a higher level. (It's no longer 'plug and chug' solve for x kind of mathematics)

This early exposure is crucial, and I forsee a sharp drop in the number of successful math students in university, because once you hit 3rd year math, everything changes. You're no longer asked 'find the derivative of this' and instead are asked things like 'Prove the chain rule.'

It's not as hard as it sounds...it's literally as I suggested, take small building blocks and build up to solve the bigger problem. However students are now entering university with absolutely no prior knowledge of how to do this...and Math is not a spectator sport, it takes practice more than anything.

Hmmm, I maybe that was taken out in my year.... I don't quite remember those. But it sounds very fascinating. Perhaps I shall explore it next summer. I like puzzles and problems ^-^

I think that course (Called "Geometry and Discrete Math" or in other cases "Algebra and Geometry") was removed 2 years ago. I guess we'll have to see in a year or two how students handle 3rd year math...but I'm a skeptic.

That makes me sad too, Math always gets the bum rap.

EDIT: If you like math problems, look into the Putnam contest! It's a very difficult math contest written every year by undergraduate students across North America. Usually Harvard or MIT wins it, but it's still fun! (And the median grade is usually 0!)

what!? they removed that class?!?!?! mega lame! It was so helpful!

Originally Posted by Mowicz

Not exactly. (Haha *Math side kicks in*)

Trig proofs aren't 'proofs.' To be precise, they were called "Trig Identities" and they are more like derivations than proofs. You move from one line to the next using certain 'rules' and other identities you take as theorems...these aren't as hard as the 'proofs' I'm referring to (but this is all semantics anyway). These are still in the curriculum (I believe), and they're in Grade 11 U (and possibly M) level math. It's not wrong to call them proofs, because they 'prove' the identites are correct...but I'm referring to a different style of thinking.

The kind of proofs I'm talking about are ones that involve Euclid's Axioms (commonly called "Circle proofs"), and little basic puzzle pieces that you must arrange to solve a larger problem.

You're given some axioms ('things assumed true without proof') like a straight line is 180 degrees, and when you cut it with a second line, the sum of the angles must still be 180 degrees.

You were traditionally given a picture, and a question like "Prove this quadrilateral is cyclic." And you'd have to know the theory, such things as "Every parallelogram is cyclic" and try and prove that your polygon is infact a parallelogram (ie. opposite angles sum to 180, opposite sides are parallel).

This is the kind of stuff I'm referring to...they're not particularly difficult ideas, but they course was tougher than anything in highschool math today because they require you to think on a bit of a higher level. (It's no longer 'plug and chug' solve for x kind of mathematics)

This early exposure is crucial, and I forsee a sharp drop in the number of successful math students in university, because once you hit 3rd year math, everything changes. You're no longer asked 'find the derivative of this' and instead are asked things like 'Prove the chain rule.'

It's not as hard as it sounds...it's literally as I suggested, take small building blocks and build up to solve the bigger problem. However students are now entering university with absolutely no prior knowledge of how to do this...and Math is not a spectator sport, it takes practice more than anything.

I'm pretty sure that trig identities was as far as we got with "proofs" in high school. The only other things I remember being similar were "prove the product rule using first principles" and "Prove the sin law using a picture/graph". I don't think anyone actually understood how to prove the sin law with a picture/graph; we just memorized the picture :p

In first year, I think we touched on proofs very slightly in the end where we learned the axioms for a subspace and the rules for matrices/determinants...

Seems like everything is getting progressively easier. My brother, who is in grade 10 now, has way less work than I did :(.

Originally Posted by lala22

1 - social sciences

2 - living on res, i hope i get what i wannnnnt

3 - really excited!

what rez do u wish to get?

Definitely, temara...solving systems of equations with matrices is such a useful skill to have in highschool! (It's not like it's hard) It helps everywhere in the sciences.

Originally Posted by Ownaginatios

I'm pretty sure that trig identities was as far as we got with "proofs" in high school. The only other things I remember being similar were "prove the product rule using first principles" and "Prove the sin law using a picture/graph". I don't think anyone actually understood how to prove the sin law with a picture/graph; we just memorized the picture :p

Since you mentioned first principles, then I think it shows you know what I mean...that the stuff done in highschool doesn't constitute 'proofs,' haha. Actually, a picture proof of the sine law is more like a proof than the other stuff...because it uses Euclid's axioms! That's the kind of stuff you would do in Geometry and Discrete.

In first year, I think we touched on proofs very slightly in the end where we learned the axioms for a subspace and the rules for matrices/determinants...

Seems like everything is getting progressively easier. My brother, who is in grade 10 now, has way less work than I did :(.

Matrices, Vectors and Circle Proofs were the bread and butter of that course they took out. The first Linear Algebra course is basically a reiteration of that course, and the 2nd one is building on the ideas...much like entry level calculus is repeating highschool calculus.

But you know exactly what I'm talking about, for instance, you 'prove' that cancellation holds in a vector space (ie. ab = ac => b = c) using the vector space axioms.

And it certainly does seem things are getting progressively easier...did anyone go to school in Halton? What's with this "No fail, no zeroes" thing? S: