BHSc - Everyone is Special
06-17-2012 at 08:57 PM
|
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 66
Thanked:
15 Times
Liked:
73 Times
|
BHSc - Everyone is Special
Warning: This post has been reportedThis post has been flagged as violating the MacInsiders Code Of Conduct, and is being reviewed by one of our staff. It may contain offensive material. Click here to view.
When everyone is special, nobody is special.
You know what’s special? The averages in Health Science.
However, perhaps I’m missing something. Let me know if you catch something.
It looks like there are roughly 750 students in the BHSc in any given year. Of these 750 students, a total of 118 of them received a senate scholarship, and 45 of them received a Harry Lyman scholarship. The University dictates that these students should be somewhere in the top 10-15% of their faculty. However, I’ve overestimated the number of eligible students, because grads aren’t considered (correct?). So, I’ll shave 150 students from the earlier estimate- 600 are eligible. Of these 600 eligible students, roughly 160 of them were given scholarships. That’s the top 26%. So, the cut-off for the top 26% is 11.7.
So, the top quarter of the program averages a perfect year. If these kids are brilliant enough to dictate this type of preferential treatment, they’d have no problem beating the curve in courses with the masses. Of course, they wouldn’t, not nearly to the same extent.
So, at the end of four years, you have a piece of paper that says you were brilliant in high school.
What a joke. I hope you aren't my future doctor.
References:
http://sfas.mcmaster.ca/pdf/2010/201...or%20award.pdf
http://www.mcmaster.ca/avpira/statis...rad07 11.html
|
Last edited by WalkerBlue : 06-17-2012 at 09:04 PM.
alyssarr, Atheist?, bigbob, evilgino, francis, gmoney, hatorade, icecubz, jim1, L'Étoile, lt93, Mahratta, MichaelScott, oranges, Osama, peace, Silver, stressedspec, TheBrickWall, zwitter
like this.
|
06-17-2012 at 09:17 PM
|
#1
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 26
Thanked:
1 Time
Liked:
0 Times
|
my only question is why does everyone graduate with distinction? http://registrar.mcmaster.ca /convo...012-%20HSc.pdf
everyone has a star beside their name....it kind of takes away from the integrity of what "distinction" means.
|
06-17-2012 at 09:32 PM
|
#2
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4
Thanked:
0 Times
Liked:
0 Times
|
[quote=WalkerBlue;3205 27] If these kids are brilliant enough to dictate this type of preferential treatment, they’d have no problem beating the curve in courses with the masses. Of course, they wouldn’t, not nearly to the same extent.
Can you quote that part of your statement which I bolded or give some kind of support to it? Thanks.
|
06-17-2012 at 09:33 PM
|
#3
|
Elite Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 507
Thanked:
70 Times
Liked:
192 Times
|
__________________
Science. Science is pretty cool.
- PK Health Science III
|
06-17-2012 at 09:36 PM
|
#4
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 14
Thanked:
0 Times
Liked:
9 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by WalkerBlue
So, the top quarter of the program averages a perfect year. If these kids are brilliant enough to dictate this type of preferential treatment, they’d have no problem beating the curve in courses with the masses. Of course, they wouldn’t, not nearly to the same extent.
|
How did you arrive at the conclusion that the top quarter of the program averages a perfect year? You must know that grades are normally distributed...
|
06-17-2012 at 09:42 PM
|
#5
|
Account Disabled by User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,392
Thanked:
347 Times
Liked:
345 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by francis
|
By my count, all but seven of them have a star beside their names...
I'd hate to be one of those seven.
I think "distinction" is above a 9.5 regardless of faculty or class standing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lookatme
How did you arrive at the conclusion that the top quarter of the program averages a perfect year? You must know that grades are normally distributed...
|
In theory grades are normally distributed. In health sci (and I suspect in many of the smaller programs as well), this isn't always the case. It's easily possible that a quarter of health scis have above an 11.7 average. Look at the number of people from health sci who get the President's award (or whatever it is, the award you get for getting a 12.0 SA). It's certainly not a normal distribution.
|
06-17-2012 at 09:42 PM
|
#6
|
Elite Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 974
Thanked:
89 Times
Liked:
366 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lookatme
How did you average at the conclusion that the top quarter of the program averages a perfect year? You must know that grades are normally distributed...
|
Eh, 26% getting 11.7+ is close enough to the top quarter averaging a perfect year. Compare that to 2.6% of engineering students getting over a 10.8. These numbers come from my post in the other thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahratta
|
Anyway, you're right, the grades are normally distributed. The thing is that the domain over which they are distributed happens to be between 11.5 and 12, rather than 0 and 12.
(\sarcasm...just in case)
Last edited by Mahratta : 06-17-2012 at 09:49 PM.
|
06-17-2012 at 09:51 PM
|
#7
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 14
Thanked:
0 Times
Liked:
9 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nerual
By my count, all but seven of them have a star beside their names...
I'd hate to be one of those seven.
I think "distinction" is above a 9.5 regardless of faculty or class standing.
In theory grades are normally distributed. In health sci (and I suspect in many of the smaller programs as well), this isn't always the case. It's easily possible that a quarter of health scis have above an 11.7 average. Look at the number of people from health sci who get the President's award (or whatever it is, the award you get for getting a 12.0 SA). It's certainly not a normal distribution.
|
I was just pointing a flaw in your math. But I don't understand, what's your point? Are you implying that because everybody gets a high average in Health Science, that we're somehow incompetent?
First year health sciences students have to take a full-year Chemistry as their mandatory course, and we take it with all the life scis and engineers. And we consistently get marks at the end of the bell curve. Speaking from personal experience, a lot of health scis work REALLY REALLY hard, and I find it really disrespectful when you undermine our effort just because everybody does so well. It's also flawed reasoning.
|
06-17-2012 at 09:56 PM
|
#8
|
Account Disabled by User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,392
Thanked:
347 Times
Liked:
345 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lookatme
I was just pointing a flaw in your math. But I don't understand, what's your point? Are you implying that because everybody gets a high average in Health Science, that we're somehow incompetent?
First year health sciences students have to take a full-year Chemistry as their mandatory course, and we take it with all the life scis and engineers. And we consistently get marks at the end of the bell curve. Speaking from personal experience, a lot of health scis work REALLY REALLY hard, and I find it really disrespectful when you undermine our effort just because everybody does so well. It's also flawed reasoning.
|
Woah back off. It wasn't my math or reasoning, I wasn't implying anything, and that was my first post in this thread. I was correcting another poster's counting and assumption about the bell curve.
My post was actually more defensive of health sci, than attacking it.
And the bell curve I was referring to wasnt within a course, but a normal distribution of marks within the program itself. In theory there should be a normal distribution amonst the people in each program, and that's not the case in health sci (or a number of other small-ish programs). I don't understand how you make the leap from there to incompetence. Stop being overly defensive and accusatory.
Funny you use chemistry as an example. I TA'd that course for a couple of years. Not all the health scis get awesome grades. There's no "we consistently get marks at the top of the bell curve". Some of you do, some of you don't. Some are very hard workers, and some aren't, and I expect that's the same in any program. I do find, though, that the stereotype about health sci holds true for about half of the people in the program, while saying nothing about the other half. I have a number of examples I can point to to back that up, but that's really not the point of this thread.
|
06-17-2012 at 10:00 PM
|
#9
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 14
Thanked:
0 Times
Liked:
9 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nerual
Woah back off. It wasn't my math or reasoning, I wasn't implying anything, and that was my first post in this thread. I was correcting another poster's counting and assumption about the bell curve.
My post was actually more defensive of health sci, than attacking it.
And the bell curve I was referring to wasnt within a course, but a normal distribution of marks within the program itself. In theory there should be a normal distribution amonst the people in each program, and that's not the case in health sci (or a number of other small-ish programs). I don't understand how you make the leap from there to incompetence. Stop being overly defensive and accusatory.
Funny you use chemistry as an example. I TA'd that course for a couple of years. Not all the health scis get awesome grades. There's no "we consistently get marks at the top of the bell curve". Some of you do, some of you don't. Some are very hard workers, and some aren't, and I expect that's the same in any program. I do find, though, that the stereotype about health sci holds true for about half of the people in the program, while saying nothing about the other half. I have a number of examples I can point to to back that up, but that's really not the point of this thread.
|
Oops! I guess I was directing the "incompetence" remark to the OP's remark that "I hope you aren't my doctor." I guess in my mind, I lumped you two together.
|
06-17-2012 at 10:05 PM
|
#10
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 253
Thanked:
26 Times
Liked:
53 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lookatme
I was just pointing a flaw in your math. But I don't understand, what's your point? Are you implying that because everybody gets a high average in Health Science, that we're somehow incompetent?
First year health sciences students have to take a full-year Chemistry as their mandatory course, and we take it with all the life scis and engineers. And we consistently get marks at the end of the bell curve. Speaking from personal experience, a lot of health scis work REALLY REALLY hard, and I find it really disrespectful when you undermine our effort just because everybody does so well. It's also flawed reasoning.
|
Well, I am in life sci and I can guarantee you that in my first year, my easiest courses were intro chem which i got 12s on both. I used to think health sci kids do work rly hard, however, these numbers and averages are ridiculous. You guys consistently get the end of bellcurve because honestly, chemistry is probably one of the few courses you guys have an exam on and you guys have much more time to study for it than we, life scis do. I had 3 exams (kine,chem and psych) in one week, while you guys only have probably 2 exams per term max. We have courses like biology 1m03 which consumes our time completely (essays, projects, readings,etc...). The cutoff for life sci is 88 for high school students, and you guys say you work rly hard, which I do believe. However, I know a lot of people who have rly high avg in high school (higher than most health scis) but I do not see 25% of them getting 11.7+ ... From the health scis I have seen, they OBVIOUSLY work less than life scis and since you guys focus more on group work, there is much less stress on the individual. McMaster favours health scis way too much and I think it is time to pay more attention to the life scis, which makes up more of the student body.
|
06-17-2012 at 10:07 PM
|
#11
|
Elite Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 974
Thanked:
89 Times
Liked:
366 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lookatme
Are you implying that because everybody gets a high average in Health Science, that we're somehow incompetent?
First year health sciences students have to take a full-year Chemistry as their mandatory course, and we take it with all the life scis and engineers. And we consistently get marks at the end of the bell curve. Speaking from personal experience, a lot of health scis work REALLY REALLY hard, and I find it really disrespectful when you undermine our effort just because everybody does so well. It's also flawed reasoning.
|
Why so defensive?
Nobody is suggesting you're incompetent, but it's pretty obvious that health sci (and other small faculty) students aren't graded relative to the rest of their class in the same way as students in other faculties are; if they are, then the average grade that health sci (/artsci / whatever other small program) profs aim for is far higher than the average grade profs in other faculties aim for.
In any case, there's something to be explained, stop trying to drown the point out by making unfounded accusations.
Also, first-year chemistry (first year in general) isn't really indicative of very much.
|
06-17-2012 at 10:09 PM
|
#12
|
Elite Member
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,511
Thanked:
193 Times
Liked:
392 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lookatme
I was just pointing a flaw in your math. But I don't understand, what's your point? Are you implying that because everybody gets a high average in Health Science, that we're somehow incompetent?
First year health sciences students have to take a full-year Chemistry as their mandatory course, and we take it with all the life scis and engineers. And we consistently get marks at the end of the bell curve. Speaking from personal experience, a lot of health scis work REALLY REALLY hard, and I find it really disrespectful when you undermine our effort just because everybody does so well. It's also flawed reasoning.
|
why mention chem >_> chem 1a03/1aa3 is pretty easy and your only exam...along with maybe physics 1l03 and econ 1b03. per year.
|
06-17-2012 at 10:12 PM
|
#13
|
Memento Mori
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,019
Thanked:
137 Times
Liked:
878 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gggggg
Well, I am in life sci and I can guarantee you that in my first year, my easiest courses were intro chem which i got 12s on both. I used to think health sci kids do work rly hard, however, these numbers and averages are ridiculous. You guys consistently get the end of bellcurve because honestly, chemistry is probably one of the few courses you guys have an exam on and you guys have much more time to study for it than we, life scis do. I had 3 exams (kine,chem and psych) in one week, while you guys only have probably 2 exams per term max.
|
I was in Life Sci and personally, Chem was one of the harder courses. I can also tell you that having less exams just means that there's more work during the semester. I got through Life Sci by studying for a few days before the hell week that contained all of my midterms, then coasted through the rest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gggggg
We have courses like biology 1m03 which consumes our time completely (essays, projects, readings,etc...). The cutoff for life sci is 88 for high school students, and you guys say you work rly hard, which I do believe.
|
You're joking right? BIO 1M03 forced you to memorize a bunch of stupid and regurgitate it onto each midterm. How is that difficult? And we had 1 project in that course, don't remember this essay you're referring to, and no readings outside of studying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gggggg
However, I know a lot of people who have rly high avg in high school (higher than most health scis) but I do not see 25% of them getting 11.7+ ...
|
Overall, Health Scis have much higher entrance averages (the majority of the Faculty wins the President's Award for 95+ entrance average) so you may know a few who have higher entrance averages but they are the exception, not the majority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gggggg
From the health scis I have seen, they OBVIOUSLY work less than life scis and since you guys focus more on group work, there is much less stress on the individual. McMaster favours health scis way too much and I think it is time to pay more attention to the life scis, which makes up more of the student body.
|
You start off with some nice selection bias then finish by chastising group work, which I personally know there isn't much of in Life Sci, so you're not really speaking of experience.
|
06-17-2012 at 10:14 PM
|
#14
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 198
Thanked:
38 Times
Liked:
80 Times
|
I would say something like "Haters gonna Hate" or "Why can't we all just get along" but this is just sad.
Most of the criticism I've seen of Health Science comes from people who have little to no idea about the program because, well, they aren't in the program. Not all of the criticism though, and I often find that the criticism that I find most agreeable is the ones from people with proper perspective.
I know I'm resorting to a lowly form of argument, instead of directly refuting comments at their core, I'm calling into fact the validity of the speakers, but honestly, if people are worried about the marks they are receiving, they should be complaining to their own faculties instead of calling into question the work ethic of those in other faculties.
I've been in life and health science, both have their advantages and disadvantages. All I know is that I did well in both because I worked hard and I feel my marks were deserved. To bring into argument receiving "higher marks" in health science, one would have to consider individuals that do no work at all. Do they still get 9s and 10s, even with no work done? I really can't say. Honestly, just as it has been said, as entry into the program tries to get individuals which will be working towards their grade, you won't really come across many of these "no work" individuals to test this out. this entry system is mostly successful.
If I'm ever a doctor, I strongly encourage you to look at the degree on my wall and leave if you're inclined to do so. This will be beneficial for all parties involved in the doctor-patient dynamic.
Good day.
__________________
*******
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
McMaster University News and Information, Student-run Community, with topics ranging from Student Life, Advice, News, Events, and General Help.
Notice: The views and opinions expressed in this page are strictly those of the student(s) who authored the content. The contents of this page have not been reviewed or approved by McMaster University or the MSU (McMaster Students Union). Being a student-run community, all articles and discussion posts on MacInsiders are unofficial and it is therefore always recommended that you visit the official McMaster website for the most accurate up-to-date information.
| |