BHSc - Keep it Respectful
06-18-2012 at 02:02 PM
|
#1
|
Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 66
Thanked:
15 Times
Liked:
73 Times
|
BHSc - Keep it Respectful
Firstly, I'd like to apologize. I had intended to write an article that was inflammatory and provocative. I succeeded, but not without being excessively insulting. I believe I let my own bias show through with my penultimate concluding remark, I firmly believe that a number of the brightest students in the country reside in the BHSc program. I should also include that I've never applied for medical school, taken a university level science course, or watched an episode of House.
My goal however, was to spark a discussion about what appears to be hyper-inflation of grades.
I am a fairly dedicated student, and do well because of that dedication. While I score better than my peers, I’m not particularly gifted, and most of them would annihilate me on an IQ test. I have a firm belief in the merits of hard work, something university instilled in me, and it bothers me that there are a group of highly gifted individuals who may not be receiving the same lesson. I find it odd that one student out of the thousands in the social sciences was able to attain a perfect average two years ago, while hundreds of students come within inches of the same accomplishment elsewhere.
Where is the distinction between good and excellent performance in this program?
I hope that this discussion can be continued in a respectful manner.
Last edited by WalkerBlue : 06-18-2012 at 04:58 PM.
|
06-18-2012 at 02:20 PM
|
#2
|
Resident Artist
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 550
Thanked:
44 Times
Liked:
244 Times
|
No offense taken. Thought you had some valid points, personally...but apology accepted :.)
|
06-19-2012 at 10:36 PM
|
#3
|
Account Disabled by User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,392
Thanked:
347 Times
Liked:
345 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by WalkerBlue
Where is the distinction between good and excellent performance in this program?
I hope that this discussion can be continued in a respectful manner.
|
These are my thoughts...
Health sci has a lot of group projects, thus making it easy for some people to slack, provided that the other members of their group are hardworking and pick up the slack, and all the students in the group get the same mark. This is something that was discussed and generally agreed upon in the last thread.
Thus, good and excellent performance (or poor performance) can't easily be distinguished by grades in this program. I'd argue that grades aren't a good measure of how much a person has learned anyways (in any program), but in health sci they seem to be a particularly bad indicator because of how the program is set up.
Since grades are used by the university, these awards don't accurately reflect the performance of the individuals in this program who receive (or don't receive) them.
I know some extremely hardworking people in health sci who got 12 averages and definitely deserved them. I also know some who did not at all. You look at the quality of their work in and outside academics (work/volunteer/practical experience) and talk to their supervisors or others working closely with them, and that's where you can see the difference.
|
06-20-2012 at 02:36 AM
|
#4
|
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2,998
Thanked:
277 Times
Liked:
526 Times
|
The way I always saw it was that HSc kids are "taken care of". Because they are the crown jewel of Mac, there is going to be some inflation. I was always told from people who go to HSc the hardest part was getting in.
|
06-20-2012 at 07:30 AM
|
#5
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 138
Thanked:
25 Times
Liked:
52 Times
|
To clear up the issue regarding Senate/Hooker scholarships:
Bachelor of Health Sciences is not a faculty - it's a program. There are other undergraduate programs in the Faculty of Health Sciences (nursing, midwifery). I believe that if you include those students in the total pool, of which 163 received Senate/Hooker scholarships, the percentage works out to be less than 10%.
EDIT: A BHSc alumnus proposed this idea on LL, so I thought it'd be good to post it here
Last edited by TheCrucible : 06-20-2012 at 07:36 AM.
|
06-20-2012 at 08:19 AM
|
#6
|
Account Locked
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 687
Thanked:
53 Times
Liked:
287 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeoku
The way I always saw it was that HSc kids are "taken care of". Because they are the crown jewel of Mac, there is going to be some inflation. I was always told from people who go to HSc the hardest part was getting in.
|
Who was it that deemed the Health Sci students the "crown jewel" of McMaster? ive been here for 3 years and have never once heard anything of this sort.
I mean I know the commerce program is out of the question for being the top program, but i am just curious where this statement came from
|
06-20-2012 at 09:43 AM
|
#7
|
Elite Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,014
Thanked:
408 Times
Liked:
2,314 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by WalkerBlue
... or watched an episode of House....
|
Bullshit, lol.
|
06-20-2012 at 10:09 AM
|
#8
|
Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 46
Thanked:
3 Times
Liked:
9 Times
|
One thing that bother me is how HthSci is constantly compared to LifeSci. So what if LifeSci is in fact harder? Did anyone guarantee you that LifeSci would be of the same difficulty as HthSci? No. You went into the program knowing it was a much bigger program (in terms of numbers) and anticipating that you would have to work hard.
Take Western for instance. They have a science program and a health science program. The kids know that the health science program is somewhat lighter. However, they don't have the kind of flame wars we do. In fact, so so many bright students choose to enter the science program instead of their health science. Although it is true that the nature of their HthSci is different from ours, the big difference I can see is that we have limited enrollment, leading to many rejections, and thus bitterness.
I don't see any engineers on here making threads about how humanities kids have much fewer hours of classes, how they don't have labs, how sometimes they don't have exams for their courses ( because they write essays).
You have to look at a faculty in isolation, not compare it to some other because programs are very different and you went into your program with full knowledge that it could be vastly different from some other program the university offers. So why compare your program with others? You chose to come to Mac. You chose to enter your program.
|
06-20-2012 at 10:20 AM
|
#9
|
Elite Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,014
Thanked:
408 Times
Liked:
2,314 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeria
You have to look at a faculty in isolation, not compare it to some other because programs are very different and you went into your program with full knowledge that it could be vastly different from some other program the university offers. So why compare your program with others? You chose to come to Mac. You chose to enter your program.
|
Well the issue is whether or not the grades are inflated and scholarships are being given out more in health sci, compared to something like life science.. not what you just said.
Even if these people ARE really as smart as the 'statistics' say, the rewards given to the top students should be consistent across all faculties... but if its easier to get a 12 in one faculty compared to another, then, well theres an issue there.
|
06-20-2012 at 10:31 AM
|
#10
|
Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 46
Thanked:
3 Times
Liked:
9 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RyanC
but if its easier to get a 12 in one faculty compared to another, then, well theres an issue there.
|
Lol, so you're saying its just as easy to get a 12 in Humanities as it is in LifeSci? Ofcourse not, humanities courses are subjective, making it very difficult to get a 12 because of the many many writing tasks involved. In LifeSci, the courses are marked much more objectively. As proof, last year 2 people from the entire faculty of Humanities were on the Provost Honour Roll. While 13 people from the entire faculty of Science were.
Does that mean that Humanities students should complain that it is easier to get 12 in Science? No because they entered their program knowing the nature of the courses and anticipating that subjective grading would likely lead to them getting lower grades than people in science programs for instance.
|
06-20-2012 at 10:52 AM
|
#11
|
Account Disabled by User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,392
Thanked:
347 Times
Liked:
345 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeria
One thing that bother me is how HthSci is constantly compared to LifeSci. So what if LifeSci is in fact harder? Did anyone guarantee you that LifeSci would be of the same difficulty as HthSci? No. You went into the program knowing it was a much bigger program (in terms of numbers) and anticipating that you would have to work hard.
Take Western for instance. They have a science program and a health science program. The kids know that the health science program is somewhat lighter. However, they don't have the kind of flame wars we do. In fact, so so many bright students choose to enter the science program instead of their health science. Although it is true that the nature of their HthSci is different from ours, the big difference I can see is that we have limited enrollment, leading to many rejections, and thus bitterness.
|
I think it's incredibly arrogant to believe that everyone who doesn't like the program was rejected from it, or is bitter because they were rejected. I know a few people who applied, got rejected, and ended up being very glad they WEREN'T in health sci.
Also, I have my doubts that life sci (beyond first year) is harder. I think there's so much wiggle room in each degree that it is what you make of it. If you choose, you can make a health sci program full of hard courses, and you can do the same for life sci. You could also do the opposite, and take a ton of bird courses, in both programs.
I think they're compared because people assume if you're doing science, it's either life sci or health sci. Physical and enviro are very small in comparison.
|
06-20-2012 at 10:54 AM
|
#12
|
Elite Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 974
Thanked:
89 Times
Liked:
366 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeria
Lol, so you're saying its just as easy to get a 12 in Humanities as it is in LifeSci? Ofcourse not, humanities courses are subjective, making it very difficult to get a 12 because of the many many writing tasks involved. In LifeSci, the courses are marked much more objectively. As proof, last year 2 people from the entire faculty of Humanities were on the Provost Honour Roll. While 13 people from the entire faculty of Science were.
Does that mean that Humanities students should complain that it is easier to get 12 in Science? No because they entered their program knowing the nature of the courses and anticipating that subjective grading would likely lead to them getting lower grades than people in science programs for instance.
|
I agree with this, but don't ignore the fact: health science is overrepresented -- take financial allotment (via scholarships) and the Provost's list.
Also, as for your second point, did science students enter knowing that whatever type of grading would lead to them getting lower grades than people in health science?
Last edited by Mahratta : 06-20-2012 at 11:00 AM.
|
06-20-2012 at 11:11 AM
|
#13
|
Elite Member
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 360
Thanked:
14 Times
Liked:
64 Times
|
Oops... 12 char
|
06-20-2012 at 11:13 AM
|
#14
|
Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 46
Thanked:
3 Times
Liked:
9 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by nerual
I think it's incredibly arrogant to believe that everyone who doesn't like the program was rejected from it, or is bitter because they were rejected. I know a few people who applied, got rejected, and ended up being very glad they WEREN'T in health sci.
|
No one said that everyone was bitter. However when the majority of the critics of a program are those who wanted to enter the program in the first place but were unsuccessful in applying, what better conclusion can be made?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahratta
Also, as for your second point, did science students enter knowing that whatever type of grading would lead to them getting lower grades than people in health science?
|
They entered with the knowledge that LifeSci is a much bigger program (so you can anticipate the competitiveness) and that it doesn't entail nearly as much group work (which as discussed does inflate your grades). They also entered with the knowledge that HthSci is more often people's first choice program (for whatever reason) compared to LifeSci. Also, as a high school grad, it is very easy to Google things like the Provost Honour Roll and Senate and Hooker Scholarships online. Something I did, and if you saw that more HthScis were getting such awards, then this is something you could have known as well, had you done the research.
|
06-20-2012 at 11:13 AM
|
#15
|
Account Disabled by User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,392
Thanked:
347 Times
Liked:
345 Times
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexmahone
Oops... 12 char
|
This has nothing to do with the thread. http://registrar.mcmaster.ca /CALEN...13/pg1882.html
|
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.
| |