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. 2 points
    I think, in general, STEM is harder than humanities and social sciences, just in terms of workload. There are also tiers of universities in terms of difficulty. U of T is first tier. Without a doubt, the curves are most brutal, combined with a terrible undergrad experience. Mac, Wloo, Queens are second tier. Western, Laurier, Ottawa, Carleton, York and Ryerson are third tier. And the rest are just 4th tier. That being said, there are great students in every program and every school, so program and school difficulty can only go so far.
  16. 2 points
  17. 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).
  18. 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.
  19. 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).
  20. 1 point
    But it’s not a score you can “anticipate acceptance” with.
  21. 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!
  22. 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.
  23. 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.
  24. 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.
  25. 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
  26. 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.
  27. 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.
  28. 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.
  29. 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.
  30. 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.
  31. 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.
  32. 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.
  33. 1 point
    STEM subjects are much easier to get an A on compared to social sciences/humanities, though. I still don't know why I got an A in one polisci course and a B in a similar polisci course (the answer is probably a combination of different TA grading styles and how awake I was on exam day). Also, I always wonder where these extremely confident-sounding assertions that University X is far harder than University Y in terms of the grading curve come from. Surely no one's attended every class at every school in order to properly compare them. I don't know about STEM (maybe there are concrete numbers proving that UofT is the hardest of them all to get an A in), but in terms of social sciences/humanities I would definitely think a lot of grading comes down to luck of the draw in terms of professors and TAs (hence my anecdote above).
  34. 1 point
    Why would we look at the unadjusted average grades? Surely the adjusted grades are what matters (aside, you think final grades in the arts and sciences are unadjusted? I once marked an econ final where the average was 60%. That was not the final class average). Do we actually have any evidence that there are system difference in Aveverage GPA/distribution between programs.
  35. 1 point
    admitted yesterday! cpa: 3.42 l2: approx 3.65 lsat: 160 former queens undegrad can't really believe i got accepted. good luck to all those still waiting!
  36. 1 point
    One of the smartest people that I know had a poli sci degree. My gold medalist had an english lit degree. Anecdotal evidence is just that. Not sure why people think gender studies is an easy field. Y'all ever read Judith Butler? Haraway? It's fairly inaccessible.
  37. 1 point
    It's definitely common. I brought my family along too
  38. 1 point
    What does this even mean? Is this a waitlist? My status just changed to this like 3 days ago.
  39. 1 point
    Having graduated from UTSG, my advice to you is to work extra hard. The average grade at UTSG is 67% and to get into law school, you'll need 80% or higher. For first & second year courses, profs are told they can only allow 5% of the class to get a grade of A minus or higher (yes, I saw the memo with my own eyes).
  40. 1 point
    Congrats Guys!!! This is great news
  41. 1 point
    Congrats! That's amazing!!!!
  42. 1 point
    I went to the one in Feb but I brought both my parents with. A lot of other people did as well.
  43. 1 point
    Waitlisted last week. I am happy of this news (better than a rejection) but very surprised and it confuses my plans. I have accepted Queen's but McGill would mean my family and I can stay in Montreal. If anyone has any information about the waitlist, please share :S . Should I plan for Kingston or wait... It will be very appreciated ! cGPA: 3.4 L2: 3.8 LSAT: 167
  44. 1 point
    Can confirm that table that was posted above is accurate, with first year associate salaries starting at $101,000 now for many big firms. I know one mid-size firm is starting associates at $104,000. Have also heard that Sangra Moller and Cassels Brock start at around $110,000 (possibly more).
  45. 1 point
    Coming out of the woodwork to give people a confirmed salary chart update for Vancouver. Essentially 6-8 of the downtown firms have done a slight bump of their comp table: 1yr) 101 2yr) 111 3yr) 121 4yr) 132 5yr) 145 6yr) 155 7yr) 170 Some others are approximately 3-5 grand below on each amount above. Also note that the later year salaries will often be negotiable and vary more than the early year ones. Also also I missed these forums. If there is anyone interested I may do an "ama" as an early years associate solicitor in a big firm downtown vanvouver. Ok cool bye
  46. 1 point
    Take the test now. Almost no one materially improves for four straight months. I used to tutor the LSAT - if your natural landing pad with some amount of practice is 170ish, write the test in July and be pissed off you have two more months of practice to keep yourself sharp. Don't study much, do practice tests and do not stress this at all.
  47. 1 point
    Not my screwup, but hilarious nonetheless: In Schmor Estate v Weber, 2010 ONSC 586, Brown J wrote:
  48. 1 point
    I've been lurking this forum for a while and I've seen your posts, I FEEL YOU! Crossing my fingers for both of us!
  49. 1 point
    I had an interview with the City in 2010 (i.e. for an articling position beginning in fall 2011). My grades at that point were pretty average, with a couple of Cs but also some As. At the end of 2L I was probably around the median of my class. I had some government experience. I had extracurriculars during law school but they weren't law-related. The questions didn't really probe my legal knowledge. I got at least one weird question ("would you rather do X absurd thing or Y absurd thing"), one or two questions about my transcript (including one about a C grade), and some about my previous work experience. There were two parts to the interview. The first part was an actual sit-down interview with two counsel. After that, one of them brought me upstairs to meet one of the higher-ups. Everyone was very pleasant. I got a very good impression of the Division - not so much concerning their qualities as a legal department, since it's hard to gauge that, but rather that they'd be a pleasant group of people to work with.
  50. 1 point
    This post is extremely upsetting on multiple levels. For starters, your interpretation of 'law' is strictly dedicated to the private firm realm. While I will be honest and say that I'm still a law student, even I am cognizant of the opportunities that exist outside of this sphere. A law degree is a gateway degree that literally opens doors to whatever you want to do. Instead of thinking of your life as some pitiful rat race, open your eyes to the amazing reality that you are now amongst some of the most intelligent and envied members of our society. This extends not just to your financial potential in life, but also the level of social change that you can advocate for IF you decide to. This brings me to my second point. If you are disgusted with the the dichotomization of 'big law' or 'bust', why don't you realize the other roles that law school allows you to fulfill in life? I recognize that not everyone is bound to be a social justice advocate mired in thousands of dollars in debt, but you should at least open your eyes to the fact that your interpretation of where law school 'leads' you is immensely flawed. Finally, law school in and of itself is an immense privilege. I get a sense from the OP's entry that the attitude of 'a decent house costs a couple of million' is completely out of whack with what the rest of Canadian society faces everyday. Self-entitlement is not something that should pervade your advice to future law school students. I would hate to see you try living on the average Canadian income of around $35,000 per year with limited prospects of professional advancement in your career. Law school is hard. There is no doubt about it. The formalized recruitment process, competition with colleagues, and dedication to your studies are also hard. But this is LIFE - if you are expecting something different then (a) change the lens through which you look at the legal profession or (b) just get out. This kind of pessimistic attitude does not help anyone.
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...