Originally Posted by lifesciman1

A giant chunk of health scis continue into medicine statistically. Some people find it hard to believe that it's a coincidence and that the students actually are hard workers...so they attribute it to mark inflation. I am not one of those people by the way.

http://fhs.mcmaster.ca/bhsc/document...rtCha rt1.pdf

Lmao...dressage program. As in horses? Quite possibly the most random answer ever

Originally Posted by Philipp31

Can someone explain to me where the negative opinion of Health Sciences stems from in the Macinsiders community? It's really getting old...

Anyone who's actually met an average upper year HSci knows they're badass smartie pants, so the negative opinion of them is highly unfounded. Most of us just joke about them because its fun to see them get their panties all in a bunch. (or their white night defenders)


As for the thread: it is possible, but it involves sexual favours and is not recommended.

Originally Posted by biglandfarm

http://www.uwindsor.ca/advisingcentre/marking-scale

If you are a 90-94 avg student mac scale actually benefits you after converting to gpa.

But being on the higher end of any interval effectively lowers your grades it seems. 99% = 90% when the convert it.

You'll never see a 13 (or A++) on your transcript, but it is possible to get a theoretical mark higher than 12 if you're taking a course that's worth more than 3 units because of the way weighted averages work.

Getting a 12 in a one-term, 4-unit course will benefit your average as much as a 16 in a 3-unit course. A 12 in a one-term, 5-unit course (like Math 1ZZ5, but I haven't heard of any others since) is like getting a 20.

6-unit courses don't work the same way-- getting a 12 in them is always good, but since they're always spread out over two terms, it's no better then two regular 12s.

Health Sci marks are inflated. I'm sure comparison of class averages would be revealing.

Originally Posted by Entropy

You'll never see a 13 (or A++) on your transcript, but it is possible to get a theoretical mark higher than 12 if you're taking a course that's worth more than 3 units because of the way weighted averages work.

Getting a 12 in a one-term, 4-unit course will benefit your average as much as a 16 in a 3-unit course. A 12 in a one-term, 5-unit course (like Math 1ZZ5, but I haven't heard of any others since) is like getting a 20.

6-unit courses don't work the same way-- getting a 12 in them is always good, but since they're always spread out over two terms, it's no better then two regular 12s.

I am confuse.

can u explain?

course that is worth more units (4 as opposed to 3 in this case) will have a greater impact on your gpa. i thought it was alrdy explained...

You still can't get more than 12 in a course...and since all the grades are normalized to the number of units, it doesn't really matter. Sure, getting a 12 in a 4-unit course will help your GPA more than a 12 in a 3-unit course, but at the end of the day it's because you have extra units, not really the grade itself. I understand your math/logic, I just don't agree with it.

Originally Posted by Silver

course that is worth more units (4 as opposed to 3 in this case) will have a greater impact on your gpa. i thought it was alrdy explained...

31 credits instead of 30. not really a fair comparison

Originally Posted by starfish

You still can't get more than 12 in a course...and since all the grades are normalized to the number of units, it doesn't really matter. Sure, getting a 12 in a 4-unit course will help your GPA more than a 12 in a 3-unit course, but at the end of the day it's because you have extra units, not really the grade itself. I understand your math/logic, I just don't agree with it.

is this in reply to me? you dont agree with a fact i stated? im confused now.

Originally Posted by biglandfarm

I am confuse.

can u explain?

Let's take an example:

Student A:
math: 12gpa(3 units) = 36
physics: 9(3) = 27
chemistry: 7(3) = 21
programming 9(3) = 27
Total = (36+27+21+27)/12(which is the number of units that student took that term) = 9.25 << GPA

Student B:
Let's assume that math is a 5 unit course for that student, instead of 3.
math: 12gpa(5 units) = 60
physics: 9(3) = 27
chemistry: 7(3) = 21
programming 9(3) = 27
Total = (60+27+21+27)/12= 11.25 << GPA

We can see for the examples that taking a course worth a lot of units will boost our GPA.

Originally Posted by Silver

is this in reply to me? you dont agree with a fact i stated? im confused now.

No it was in reply to Entropy's post.

nice math bro... denominator for the 2nd one is 14.. so the GPA goes from 9.25 --> 9.64.

Originally Posted by jim1

Let's take an example:

Student A:
math: 12gpa(3 units) = 36
physics: 9(3) = 27
chemistry: 7(3) = 21
programming 9(3) = 27
Total = (36+27+21+27)/12(which is the number of units that student took that term) = 9.25 << GPA

Student B:
Let's assume that math is a 5 unit course for that student, instead of 3.
math: 12gpa(5 units) = 60
physics: 9(3) = 27
chemistry: 7(3) = 21
programming 9(3) = 27
Total = (60+27+21+27)/12= 11.25 << GPA

We can see for the examples that taking a course worth a lot of units will boost our GPA.

Originally Posted by RyanC

Anyone who's actually met an average upper year HSci knows they're badass smartie pants, so the negative opinion of them is highly unfounded. Most of us just joke about them because its fun to see them get their panties all in a bunch. (or their white night defenders)

I completely agree that health sci's are actually really smart and cool people, but some have a "negative opinion" because some may sometimes come off as elitists (esp in early years lol), with similar equivalents like the schulichers for example. but of course, generalizing based on anecdotal evidence would be fallacious, as i personally know a bunch of health sci'ers that are really cool people

but personally, i'm more upset towards the selective treatment from the school towards health sci's benefit, rather than health sci's themselves. everyone's probably aware that they have access to a network called learnlink which is pretty much like a localized avenue that runs off a software. but what a vast majority isn't aware of, is that they have access to a pool of old material that nobody else is given (previous quizzes, tests etc.). i'm pretty sure they all know that it's exclusive to them, yet i've never seen any of them willingly announce that they will distribute the resources for others to use. its funny because i've taken a couple health sci courses before, and had temporary access to learnlink (other biochem and nursing courses use learnlink as well; the entire health sci umbrella), but it stands that only health sci'ers have access to all the goodies. i know this because i had a friend in the program that let me on his account to download the material that i needed for my courses. i get that mac holds a lot of pride in their health sci program, but come on don't neglect your other children :'(

there's no denying that health sci's are smart, but i thought it was an unfair favoritism shown by mac as an institute. its like us civilians racing against pro athletes who are given cleats while we run in our humble sneakers
just to be clear, i very much so like health sci students; i dont like what mac's doing for them, and them only

Originally Posted by songj6

I completely agree that health sci's are actually really smart and cool people, but some have a "negative opinion" because some may sometimes come off as elitists (esp in early years lol), with similar equivalents like the schulichers for example. but of course, generalizing based on anecdotal evidence would be fallacious, as i personally know a bunch of health sci'ers that are really cool people

but personally, i'm more upset towards the selective treatment from the school towards health sci's benefit, rather than health sci's themselves. everyone's probably aware that they have access to a network called learnlink which is pretty much like a localized avenue that runs off a software. but what a vast majority isn't aware of, is that they have access to a pool of old material that nobody else is given (previous quizzes, tests etc.). i'm pretty sure they all know that it's exclusive to them, yet i've never seen any of them willingly announce that they will distribute the resources for others to use. its funny because i've taken a couple health sci courses before, and had temporary access to learnlink (other biochem and nursing courses use learnlink as well; the entire health sci umbrella), but it stands that only health sci'ers have access to all the goodies. i know this because i had a friend in the program that let me on his account to download the material that i needed for my courses. i get that mac holds a lot of pride in their health sci program, but come on don't neglect your other children :'(

there's no denying that health sci's are smart, but i thought it was an unfair favoritism shown by mac as an institute. its like us civilians racing against pro athletes who are given cleats while we run in our humble sneakers
just to be clear, i very much so like health sci students; i dont like what mac's doing for them, and them only

I don't think it's fair to say "mac" in general is letting them do that...it comes down to their faculty. Honestly I don't understand how it isn't academic dishonesty, because it's true, having access to old test/assigments that aren't otherwise distributed to students puts them at an unfair advantage. And some profs get really touchy about copyright issues if they find out their old tests have been circulated, especially profs who tend to re-use questions, or use the same questions with different numbers.

And then there are things like the biochem 2ee3 notes...the prof posts them with textbook figure references instead of figured embedded, and on learnlink (in the healthsci-only section), there's all the notes with embedded figures so you don't need to go look them up yourself (and you have them with you during class when the prof is lecturing). That isn't academic dishonesty I don't think - someone took the time to do that and then chose to share it. I don't even think there are copyright issues with something like that (though I could be wrong). But it is things like that that tend to really irritate people in other faculties, especially when you're sitting in class and the person next to you has notes with figures...and you ask where they got them and they reply, "Oh, I'm in health sci".

*disclaimer* I never took biochem 2ee3, so please don't jump down my throat saying "oh you could make notes like that too if you wanted". I'm using that example because I've heard far too many people complain about it, and things like that really do contribute to why non-health scis view health scis as spoiled and spoon-fed. Because yes, another person can make those notes themselves and share with whoever they want, but health scis don't have to, they are provided them simply because of the faculty they're in. I have heard health scis argue that this is a problem for other faculties and just because they're doing it "right" other faculties shouldn't be jealous...that there's not something wrong with health sci for getting stuff provided, there's something wrong with other faculties for not getting things provided. Really though, that's like one person bringing a cheat sheet to an exam and arguing that they're not doing anything wrong, the rest of the class should just get a cheat sheet too.