Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/27/18 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    nVidia, obviously. Every other answer is wrong. If you pick AMD, you might as well just keep your Intel onboard card for all it’s worth. No but seriously. This debate comes up every couple of months here in various forms. This one is relatively civil, which I’m happy about, but in the past it’s frequently been filled with people saying the equivalent of, “oh yeah? Well *my* A is worth more than *yours* because it’s from [insert preferential major here].” Some people just can’t get enough of feeling superior, even when they’re in a room filled with very accomplished people. It’s stupid and petty, and surprisingly has nearly no bearing in the practice of law. The only people I’ve ever heard debate the intrinsic value of an A in STEM versus the humanities have been applicants or law students. No one else (more or less) seems to care. My response to someone who so strongly believes that a humanities degree is so easy compared to whatever major they hold in such high regard, is go do the easy degree then. Get straight A’s and laugh at all the fools who try to apply to law school with their 3.3 STEM averages. But of course they won’t, because I don’t actually think most people would be willing to take the risk, because I also don’t believe most people truly buy the “lol humanities” rhetoric when it comes down to the wire.
  2. 4 points
    I guess all the universities outside Ontario count as 4th tier too because the rest of the country got no mention at all. I also went to a 4th tier university and was apparently a pity acceptance. We're so fortunate.
  3. 3 points
    I seem to recall you also saying, in another thread some time ago, that law school was quite easy for you and you did very well in it. If I’m remembering that right, I think it’s reasonable to suggest that you’re an exceptionally smart and talented person, and I don’t think your experiences can be taken to be the average. I mean, of course there are people who are quite capable of attaining high marks in both STEM and humanities, and they may even find one easier than the other. But I’d venture to guess that such a thing does not apply to most people. Science and humanities leverage two discrete types of skills. Further, evaluative components in science are usually objective, versus quite subjective for humanities. In other words, not only does it take a different type of skill to engage with the humanities, but it is also evaluated differently. Some people have aptitude for both; most people are good at one and not the other. It’s possible that the skills necessary to succeed in science translate well to humanities, thus making it seem “easier” for those people, but I don’t think that’s the case. At least, not for all of the sciences. I’ve never read any academic paper comparing the relative difficulty of science vs humanities education. I’ve tried to find some but I’ve yet to do so. If you have any you can point me to, it would be a great first start to getting some real data about this whole thing. Because until then, it’s just a bunch of people trying to prove to each other that they’re the better one, which I’m pretty sure is a massive waste of time.
  4. 3 points
    All online debates are pointless mate. Black & blue or white & gold? Who shot first? Does a balrog have wings? Is MCU or DCEU better? AMD or nVidia? If a debate mattered it wouldn’t be restricted to the internet. But we’re gonna debate these pointless topics ad nauseum anyways, because we can, and everyone on the internet wants to be right.
  5. 3 points
    What I found is that the math/science based courses I took (at least one stats at every level, intro calculus, 2nd & 3rd yr organic chem, finance, econ) were not courses I could do well in if I didn't put in time every week throughout the class, and they often monopolized my study time. But, you can check your work and be pretty confident in the grade range you will fall within if you are understanding the concepts. The social sciences I took (communications, sociology, psych, aboriginal studies, history, econ etc), still required doing the work, but I could get an A having never looked at any material prior to writing a paper, and it was generally fine to read through the class lessons and make notes in the day or 2 prior to an exam and expect to do well (most of these were taken through distance ed, so literally learning half the class 2 days before the midterm). The main difficulty with these classes is that the marking is so subjective its difficult to know if your analysis is what the prof considers adequate. It always seemed like I was handing in the first paper blind as a means to figure out what I needed to do on the next papers, since there was so much variance in expectations between profs/courses. Even still, the math and science classes were decidedly more difficult for me, simply based on the minimum effort required to do well. Not to say a class that evaluates students on the basis of four 20+ page research papers is EASY, I just didn't find it as consistently laborious as the math/science based classes.
  6. 3 points
    The more I think about it, the more I think the above point about commonalities is right. I don’t think I could have done any of the other STEM programs except maybe computer science. I never understood chem or bio well in school - they seemed like they took a lot of memorization I didn’t have the mind for. And, as unhappy as this fact made me, I simply didn’t seem to grasp the concepts in physics very well, even if the equations in the lower level stuff were easy enough to work with. Even within math, I had a very easy time with some material and an incredible struggle with others. In every other course I did, I thought that the fact that I could structure and detail an essay well automatically put me in the upper range.
  7. 2 points
    I got high at 9 am and took calculus! And I probably spent 1-1.5 hours a day on math and got As. So it is possible
  8. 2 points
    This "debate" is stupid. The degree of difficulty of a program is a relative concept dependent upon one's intellectual ability and particular skill set. I found math burdensome in high school but it was easy for some of my friends. Likewise I found literature easy whilst they at times struggled.
  9. 2 points
    Can confirm. It's half in September and half in January! It works the same as the other colleges at U of S.
  10. 2 points
    I honestly can’t believe anyone could look at a differential geometry text and a fourth year history essay and argue, with a straight face, that they are equal challenges. History programs don’t even require you to learn a second language anymore, at least not beyond the “I would like fries with that” level. I did 500-level Chinese history courses with people who couldn’t read the modern language well enough to get through a novel, let alone the classical language. Anything can be difficult. I’ve gushed over historians on this forum. But as a current reality, humanities programs expect far less of their students than do math programs, and maybe that’s true for other STEM programs. Which is to say, I think it’s insecurity, not honesty, driving the infinite disagreement on this.
  11. 2 points
    As an aside, one can imagine a version of Hell where you have to listen to the same issue being argued over and over again for all eternity.
  12. 2 points
    Definitely not. Even with a high GPA thats a long shot.
  13. 2 points
    I took a lot of math classes for my minor, I took a lot of science classes for my major and to be pre-med, and I took a few humanities courses as requirements and out of interest. This was so long ago and I am old! But from what I can remember, my math classes were probably the easiest in the sense that if you get math concepts, you get what you have to do. Numbers make sense and they don’t change. Writing a strong humanities paper took a lot more work for me. But I was also always surprised that humanities profs gave out marks for class participation when so many people were just talking shit. In science, you got points for showing up for your labs, but you had to do stuff when you were there. LOL at @theycancallyouhoju because it is true, the slackers weren’t in math or the hard sciences. A lot were in psychology, come to think of it. My ex majored in something that was full of athletes and the prof let them listen to music on game days and didn’t even cover any material.
  14. 2 points
    It’s also harder to get into Waterloo, McMaster, Queens, and Western than it is to get into U of T. Maybe the reason all the U of T people think university is hard is that they’re not able to get into the four best universities in Ontario? (Obviously, no offence to the non-pretentious U of T undergraduate students — I would feel terrible for offending them both)
  15. 1 point
    Nobody can really think that math and physics aren’t harder than history and law. Some things are conceptually difficulty and some are not. Nobody ever sat in contracts and had the professor explain that a contract requires offer and acceptance and consideration and was like “wait what I don’t follow; can you please explain that again.” But that happens all the time in math class. The “difficulty” of law school, as hoju points out, is just learning to beat the curve when the material is basic and everybody understands it but only so many As can be given out. The difficulty of a humanities degree is nonexistent because 90% of the class didn’t even read the material. But people get way too bent out of shape about this. Understanding difficult concepts is a very overrated skill. Unless you’re a rocket scientist or a math professor you don’t need to be that smart. Most of life (and all of law, which seems relevant here) ain’t that complicated. You’re better off focusing on your work ethic, attention to detail, people skills — stuff that actually matters.
  16. 1 point
    I wasn't trying to turn your argument into a strawman by any means. Just wanted to use your post as a springboard into one of my wider issues with this entire subject of which program is harder (and why people have that argument in the first place).
  17. 1 point
    I think I’m okay at school work, but I also think a lot of doing well at the undergrad level was a paucity of sincere competition. Law students put in the requisite work, over all, and I’ve long argued that doing well in law was a function more of learning how to structure exams than of understanding the law, which I really believe almost all students do. To clarify, I don’t think Heidegger is easier than calc. I think more people who just want some degree, any degree, went into my humanities courses. And my curve in those classes reflected that.
  18. 1 point
    You should 100% rewrite. GPA is okay, but not good enough to compensate for a low LSAT. Edit - I see that's a PT. That's good. Keep on studying and with a 160+ I think you will get into a few places at least
  19. 1 point
    Wait, yes I do: Johnson v. Milton (City), 2006 CanLII 27234 (ON SC). A man is killed and his wife seriously injured in a tandem bike accident. According to witnesses, the departed's last words were "oh shit".
  20. 1 point
  21. 1 point
    The worst thing for me is a prof who imposes a ceiling for no apparent reason. Curves are fine, but “never giving out a grade higher than X” doesn’t make sense. I’ve found that RateMyProfs has helped somewhat with issues like this. It is an imperfect tool that is very likely incredibly biased but it has helped me avoid certain types of profs (that is to say, “bad” profs, not “hard” ones).
  22. 1 point
    But it’s not a score you can “anticipate acceptance” with.
  23. 1 point
    I got in quite early to Western, Ottawa, and Osgoode with a LSAT 165 and cGPA 3.55 (l2 about the same). If you can your cGPA up like you've projected then I'd guess you're good for every school except UofT. Im also finishing a Master's degree but I don't know how much that helped.
  24. 1 point
    Yeah, this isn't going to help, really, but there are disciplinary issues and there are disciplinary issues. To use a non-legal example, Dr. Henry Morgentaler would be rightly described as having a history of disciplinary issues also. Some people really do get in trouble because they are pushing boundaries, advocating fiercely, etc. That said, most of the people who get in trouble are simply failing in administrative ways - they simply aren't organized enough to do all the critical things they are supposed to be doing. I'd encourage anyone to look closely and skeptically at any potential employer who has disciplinary issues, but not write them off entirely.
  25. 1 point
    I brought my family! It’s very common and a wonderful experience for all
  26. 1 point
    Trial Ad for sure! But you must make it your “A” choice because this course has very high demand. Depending on your area of interest, if you like crim law, Evidence and Proof is also amazing but has very high demand too and must be an “A” choice also. Have fun!
  27. 1 point
    I think ProfReader is right though - those are a lot of ECs, and with the lower grades you have, it's hard to escape the conclusion that you might have done better in school if you didn't have 10 ECs going on. It undermines your claim that the bad grades are due to mental health issues - you were too incapacitated to focus on school but well enough to play soccer, volunteer, be in clubs, etc? I get that some of those things might be coping tools, but it still doesn't look great. Also, none of those ECs are in and of themselves exceptional. A lot of people are peer tutors/mentors or on the executive for university clubs or play recreational sports or volunteer for cancer research due to having family members affected. As ProfReader said, those are typical things undergrads do to try to get into law. Exceptional ECs are on another level altogether. You have a decent LSAT. You will have a better PS if you narrow and focus it instead of putting all that stuff in.
  28. 1 point
    This is an absurd debate for all the reasons cited above. It’s also absurd because, let’s be honest, the rest of you aren’t fit to sniff the jock straps (or sports bras, as the case may be) of people who major in economics at Queens. That is all.
  29. 1 point
    Surely we all can agree that the old banner ad for Equine Management at Nottingham University was the hardest program and highly sought after by Morgans.
  30. 1 point
    Though, presumably, in hell you don’t have the option to ignore it.
  31. 1 point
    Id say pretty good. I got into Queens, Osgoode, Western and waitlisted Ottawa with a 3.61 and a 155/156 LSAT
  32. 1 point
    You didn't need to justify your ECs to us. But that's a whackload, so choose the ones you want to emphasize carefully. You get anywhere from 4000-8000 CHARACTERS to sell yourself in your personal statement, and it's a lot less than you think.
  33. 1 point
    Vive la D! Kevin a raison avec son commentaire, la marque de l'ordinateur importe peu, l'important est juste de t'assurer que tu aies ce qu'il faut pour la prise de notes. Certaines personnes enregistrent également les notes de cours à l'aide de leur téléphone aux cas où ils auraient manqué de quoi durant un cours. Je conseille grandement d'aller aux initiations étant donné que c'est une super belle occasion de faire des nouvelles connaissances avec des personnes que tu vas cotoyer le reste de la première année. Personnellement, pour ce qui est des techniques d'étude, ça va différer selon la personne. Certaines personnes vont lire les jurisprudences au complet avant les cours, certains le font après le cours, certains le font pas et vont juste voir des résumés en ligne. C'est vraiment à toi de déterminer au courant des premières semaines ce qui te convient le plus. Pour ma part, je préférais les survoler avant les cours, mais je ne les lisais pas au complet puisque les informations essentielles quant à x jurisprudence étaient généralement dites en cours. Bonne rentrée à toi! Avec les boosters de la D, je suis convaincu que tu seras entre de bonnes mains au courant des premières semaines
  34. 1 point
    I think the difference between STEM and non-STEM courses lies in some of the expectations of first-year students. In my experience, what made my science/math courses so challenging was that the professors expected that student truly understood concepts from high school. The tests reflected that through ridiculous questions that you couldn't prepare for by simply doing the homework/readings and listening to lectures. It's very unforgiving as well. You're out of luck if you didn't understand a previous concept well or forgot a few things from high school. It's tough to start university or take upper-year courses feeling like you're missing some crucial information. I never felt this way in my other classes (especially in first year). They started with the basics and assumed that students knew nothing about the subject. It was really easy to get caught up as well.
  35. 1 point
    If there's anything I've learned from this thread, it's that: a) math is hard, and success requires a combination of hard work and natural aptitude b) the same more or less applies to every other subject, but to different extents c) people can talk civilly about the relative difficulty of different programs, without the conversation turning into a giant pissing contest
  36. 1 point
    The fact you handed it in at all probably put you above the curve in some classes....
  37. 1 point
    Thank you for taking the time out of your day to respond to my question and providing the feedback that you have. I agree with your point in regards to the letter. I do have no idea if my LORs are really outstanding. I am just going by what other people told me, but you are correct in the sense that I have no way of knowing without comparing it with the LORs of other students. If you dont mind me asking, since you have worked in the admissions office, what type of a LOR would qualify as outstanding? Is there a sort of criteria? In regards to my ECs, in a way they are all related and important to me. Being an immigrant to Canada once upon a time myself, I found it really difficult to integrate into the Canadian society, given that I had no friends nor did I know the language. As such, now that I am more familiar with the language and capable of helping others who are in the same position that I once was, I try to spend a lot of time into helping different communities and people. For example, most of my ECs such as Frontier College and the mentorship program at school are focused on these goals of mine. While the former seeks to help newcomers develop their language skills or provide help with the completion of their homework, the latter seeks to help first year students at the university become comfortable with univeristy life. Similariy, my time at City Hall was spent working alongside council Neethan Shan developing different community activities in which newcomers can participate in. In addition, we also seeked ways in which these newcomers can become comfortable and intergrate into their respective communities. In regards to my volunteer with the Cancer society, I have lost numerous family members to cancer. In addition, it goes without saying that it is one of the leading causes of death. So I try to do my best with raising awareness and doing whatever I can to help those going through cancer. As far as soccer goes, I am actually a big soccer fan and have played the sport ever since I was a kid. It is a big passion of mine, which has helped me in dealing with many difficult moments in my life. Finally, with serving as the president of a club, I serve as the president of a club because I wanted to bring my culture into school and inviting people into seeing what the culture of my country is and whats it about. For instance, what the food is like, the people, the traditions, the holiday celebrations and etc... While I do agree in a way that they may seem unrelated on paper, but for each club or organization that I have volunteered for, they each serve a purpose which I deem important in my life and are completely committed to.
  38. 1 point
    I think grades in philosophy like most subjects depend a lot on the Professor or TA. I’ve had easy and difficult courses in both Philosophy and STEM.
  39. 1 point
    I definitely agree that anyone who actively decides to take a fourth year math course is on another level from the rest of us mere mortals, because after two first-year math classes I felt like anything more would drain my entire soul away until I was nothing more than an empty husk. On a more serious note, I agree that more people give humanities/social sciences classes that aren't their strong suit a shot over math classes, because one involves something they should be at least somewhat familiar with (writing, though I've heard so many wails from my science friends that they have to write! a 5 page essay! in 2 weeks!! in their mandatory humanities class that I'm starting to wonder) and one involves math, which can often seem arcane and difficult to grasp when the fundamentals/necessary background information isn't taught well.
  40. 1 point
    Math is hard. I think reasonable people should be able to agree on that without feeling threatened or inadequate.
  41. 1 point
    Someone who excels at, say, Political Science may find a program like Biochem very difficult. Similarly, someone who is naturally good at picking up on math or hard-science may be terrible at writing the papers the Polisci student is required to. This is all very subjective, so it doesn't mean much to compare the difficulty of programs. I found my non-science undergrad to be easy and likely would have struggled more in a science program, yet I'm sure someone that's done just as well in the sciences would experience the same challenge if they did my work. I don't think comparing the difficulty of these programs is as easy as it seems.
  42. 1 point
    Tricky texts to get through. Easy classes to get As in, though. My theory for why math is harder as a program than most of the humanities/essay programs is very straight forward: only people who are actually good at math sign up for that degree. I signed up for philosophy because, what the hell, that sounds like a fine humanities program. My roommate did “Latin American Studies” because he sort of spoke Spanish and it seemed like a few cute girls were in the program. My other buddy did poli sci because he couldn’t think of anything else. My partner did poli sci because she couldn’t think of anything else. My cousin did poli sci because he couldn’t think of anything else. My sister did history because she heard it involved fewer essays than English Lit. No one ever says “well, fuck it, I have to go to university and I have no particular talents so I might as well take math.” Ever.
  43. 1 point
    I did both. Math was hard, humanities was easy. I was a strong math student who didn’t attend their English class through high school and my math program was still, without reservation, harder than my humanities program. It was more hours of work, more assignments, the exams required more studying and the class averages were much lower, often needing to be curved up. It wasn’t a competition. I’m pretty good at math and pretty mediocre at writing - I had to try hard to get A-s for my math classes and did not have to try to get As in humanities. Maybe that’s just McGill, maybe that’s just me, but since this is just a personal measuring contest, that’s all I got.
  44. 1 point
    Although I am thankfully no longer doing admissions, I have in the past. First, your references aren't likely as "outstanding" as you think. Everyone things their letters are fantastic, but it often isn't the case. I don't think I've ever read a letter that I would describe as "outstanding" for anything other than a graduate program. However, that is neither here nor there and is just a stupid pet peeve of mine on this site where everyone talks about how great their letters are with no real way of knowing (even if they've actually read the letter, they wouldn't know it is great without reading a bunch of letters written for other students). The real piece of advice that I wanted to give you is that if I saw a very long list of unrelated ECs like you have, I would be inclined to think (rightly or wrongly) that you were doing them to get into school and not because you are especially committed or passionate about any of them. So if there is something on that list that you have a more extended involvement with or are passionate about, I would pursue that one (as opposed to being casually involved with many). Also, on my personal statement, I definitely wouldn't emphasize the quantity of ECs that you have been involved with like you did in your post (i.e. "a variety", "including but not limited to").
  45. 1 point
    No offence taken. Let me know if you find the other one; I'm still on the lookout for my soulmate. tyvm
  46. 1 point
    I don’t know which mod spliced this ( @Hegdis? @erinl2?), but this is the funniest thread title I’ve seen in months. If I knew any of you in real life, I’d buy you a beer for making me laugh so hard.
  47. 1 point
    Q1: the more fluent you are, the better the education will be for you (and access to opportunities both during and after). So decide yourself. Q2: Yes. Always. McGill or not that's a good idea. Languages are always a good thing. Q3: I only know of the gang, les francos qui frappent les anglos terribles who may give you a tough time. They come around and if they hear an obviously Anglo accent/misuse of the language, they bully you into submission.* *obviously sarcasm.
  48. 1 point
    There are also tiers of wildflower that are most likely to win the Daytona 500. Wild daffodils are first tier. Without a doubt, the six petals are underneath a trumpet-shaped corona combined with a status as the national flower of Wales (thanks Wikipedia). Fennel, red clover, poppies, and corn flowers are second tier. Buttercups and tansies are third. The rest are just fourth.
  49. 1 point
    Great courses: trial ad. Seriously, this is the best. negotiation was interesting. conflict of laws. A very pleasant surprise. estates is supposed to be good. Ditto tax. municipal was surprisingly interesting. not very useful: business associations. Do the online and take something else instead.
  50. 1 point
    I don't think that schools are transparent enough about their curves for this to be credible. Also, there is likely variation across the curves used by different faculties at some schools. I also have no idea where you got your rankings from. Even though I would definitely be against ranking by difficulty in the way that you have, I would certainly not have ranked them as you did. And I've actually taught at least 1 course at 3 of the schools on your list.
This leaderboard is set to Toronto/GMT-04:00

  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
  • Create New...