Hello all!

I was just wondering if any of you on here are applying to Waterloo. I got my application in a few weeks ago...and the waiting begins! Good luck to all :luck:

I did. I dropped it off this morning :)
Going to PCO this fall if not.
My roommate is also going to ICO this Fall.

still pondering whether or not to apply there..if you wouldn't mind sharing, what are your your guys' stats?

I'm applying to Waterloo. Applied last year and received an interview invite. They actually came to my hometown to interview 10 people from my province. My GPA and OAT have increased this year so hopefully I get in. If not, I will be US-bound...

still pondering whether or not to apply there..if you wouldn't mind sharing, what are your your guys' stats?

GPA 90.3%
OAT TS 360
OAT AA 360

I will be US bound if I get rejected. I really don't want to spend all that money though......

still pondering whether or not to apply there..if you wouldn't mind sharing, what are your your guys' stats?

You know that the deadline is over right? It was today!




Hey preoptsku, did you get in last yr? With 90% you should definitely get in. OAT's just have to be above 320. That's all. You juts write a decent essay. You don't even extracurricular. I know people in there with just high marks and no optometrist shadowing experience. Just a letter from when they went to check their eyes.

You know that the deadline is over right? It was today!
The deadline for external applicants is the end of February.


Hey preoptsku, did you get in last yr? With 90% you should definitely get in.
This will be my first year applying...and I sure hope you are right!! :laugh:

Ohmigosh, i almost crapped my pants thinking that I screwed up deadlines! :( But I am an external applicant so I have a couple more weeks *PHEW*

And this might be a really silly question, but I got sent the waterloo appl in a pdf file..is there a way I can actually TYPE my text in there? Cuz they prefer you to type everything! I am looking for a way out rather than cut and paste >_<

pre_opt_sku: your stats are amazing! mine are much much lower than yours; that's why i am too scared to apply :(

Ohmigosh, i almost crapped my pants thinking that I screwed up deadlines! :( But I am an external applicant so I have a couple more weeks *PHEW*

And this might be a really silly question, but I got sent the waterloo appl in a pdf file..is there a way I can actually TYPE my text in there? Cuz they prefer you to type everything! I am looking for a way out rather than cut and paste >_<

pre_opt_sku: your stats are amazing! mine are much much lower than yours; that's why i am too scared to apply :(

I'm not sure of any other way to do that application other than old school cutting and pasting. I just photocopied the two pages after I taped my text on to make it look less ghetto :p . You should definitely just go for it and apply! You'll never know unless you do. Have you applied to any American schools??

You already applied to OUAC right?

I'm not sure of any other way to do that application other than old school cutting and pasting. I just photocopied the two pages after I taped my text on to make it look less ghetto :p . You should definitely just go for it and apply! You'll never know unless you do. Have you applied to any American schools??




That's what I was thinking of doing..just going to cut paste. But I thought maybe someone on here found a way out. I didn't think of the whole "less ghetto" thing by photocopying! Thanks for the tip :) Yeah I will prolly just apply and if i get rejected, then I won't have any regrets. I am also applying to ICO and Pacific.

You already applied to OUAC right?



Hmm..I am thinking you are referring to me? Yes, I've already applied and have gotten permission - they won't send you an application unless u've been approved i think anyways. waterloo's process makes me so bitter! :thumbdown

Hmm..I am thinking you are referring to me? Yes, I've already applied and have gotten permission - they won't send you an application unless u've been approved i think anyways. waterloo's process makes me so bitter! :thumbdown

You think that's bad, its even worse for internal students. I have to get verified that i'm a Waterloo student and than they send me a special form, which only UW students can use. Did you like the essay part? I could only fit 380 words in it. That's so dumb.

Oh well, they only look at GPA anyways.

Oh well, they only look at GPA anyways.

The above is soo true... They accept people without interviews very early on just purely based on GPA.

The above is soo true... They accept people without interviews very early on just purely based on GPA.



:eek: is that just a rumour? i've never heard of anyone being accepted based purely on grades!

You think that's bad, its even worse for internal students. I have to get verified that i'm a Waterloo student and than they send me a special form, which only UW students can use. Did you like the essay part? I could only fit 380 words in it. That's so dumb.

Oh well, they only look at GPA anyways.


wow i didn't think it was so tedious for internal applicants either. the essay is so stupid, i've been cutting and snipping chunks out of my essay but i still can't make it fit! i seriously have no idea how you can fit all that you want to say in that tiny amount of space they give you

:eek: is that just a rumour? i've never heard of anyone being accepted based purely on grades!

It's true. I know quite a few people in the program right now. I go to UW as well. Aslong as you have an OAT 320 and 90s u're guaranteed a spot. You don't even have to be outgoing. Just answer all the questions they ask you and you're set. Ask JC1984. (Come out of the closet).

:eek: is that just a rumour? i've never heard of anyone being accepted based purely on grades!

Actually, I asked them a question during my interview last year and asked if they already accepted people. They said, "Yes, we have accepted some students already. They are the ones with the highest GPA's"

I am in first year at Waterloo right now and I can tell you that the rumours are true. Really its just marks, if you are anywhere above an 85% you're pretty much guaranteed as long as you can speak english somewhat clearly. Its very much just marks based, lots of people with great extra-curric and shadowing experience are not even interviewed if they don't have the marks. Sad process but that's the way it is I guess

hmm. weird. i thought i had a decent GPA/OAT score and they denied me last year. i didn't have 1 pre req though.

what's the 85% business anyway? ie 3.4/4.0, or??...

I am in first year at Waterloo right now and I can tell you that the rumours are true. Really its just marks, if you are anywhere above an 85% you're pretty much guaranteed as long as you can speak english somewhat clearly. Its very much just marks based, lots of people with great extra-curric and shadowing experience are not even interviewed if they don't have the marks. Sad process but that's the way it is I guess



this is so depressing! i am sure waterloo loses out to a lot of GREAT potential OD's to the US. but then again, it's their school and their admissions process unfortunately. any underdog's in these forums that go to Waterloo???! needing some inspiration here :(

this is so depressing! i am sure waterloo loses out to a lot of GREAT potential OD's to the US. but then again, it's their school and their admissions process unfortunately. any underdog's in these forums that go to Waterloo???! needing some inspiration here :(

Don't despair! There are indeed some students at UW that didn't have GPA's quite that high - though you should aim pretty close...

Its definatly true, Waterloo misses out on some potential greats - I'm glad to call many of them classmates. :D

I totally agree. Waterloo is missing out....and now, most of us who graduated are scrambling to make something of our degree, and many of us are left bitter! And after taking Optom 100 as an elective course, I didn't find our optometry school all that special. All I remembered was poor lighting, and the prof was uninteresting. Plus there's a lot of online quizzes they give their first years, a lot more theory! And the environment.... I don't know about you fellow alumni, but I'm done! After four years...man, I don't think I could gung ho for another 4 in that place!

I told my friend the other day, "Guess what? I'm smart enough to be a doctor, I got into ICO!" and he was like, "Not by WATERLOO STANDARDS!" :laugh:

Yep, Optom 100 was ever so boring. PRobaly top 3 of my boring courses. If i remeber correctly, my friend said she hasn't even seen a patient yet. And she's in 2nd yr. And they won't see any till 4th yr! Plus i don't even see a wide variety patients that come through the doors. PCO gets 75,000. I wonder how much they get... 1000? hehe

I totally agree. Waterloo is missing out....and now, most of us who graduated are scrambling to make something of our degree, and many of us are left bitter! And after taking Optom 100 as an elective course, I didn't find our optometry school all that special. All I remembered was poor lighting, and the prof was uninteresting. Plus there's a lot of online quizzes they give their first years, a lot more theory! And the environment.... I don't know about you fellow alumni, but I'm done! After four years...man, I don't think I could gung ho for another 4 in that place!

I told my friend the other day, "Guess what? I'm smart enough to be a doctor, I got into ICO!" and he was like, "Not by WATERLOO STANDARDS!" :laugh:


Did you just graduate this year? And you're having troubles finding a job? Yikes.

gee now waterloo doesn't sound too hot :thumbdown but tuition is a huge deciding factor for me :(

and for those who've already finished their applications, did you also type up the info for the "academic record" section where you list your courses and grades? from what i can assess of the application, you only type the autobiographic sketch and the essay?

just want to make sure. thanks :)

I am in first year at Waterloo right now and I can tell you that the rumours are true. Really its just marks, if you are anywhere above an 85% you're pretty much guaranteed as long as you can speak english somewhat clearly. Its very much just marks based, lots of people with great extra-curric and shadowing experience are not even interviewed if they don't have the marks. Sad process but that's the way it is I guess

Waterloos standards must be slipping. I graduated in 1996 and I knew people who had averages above 85% with great recs and extra curriculars who weren't even getting interviews much less guaranteed admissions.

That was back in the day that they only took 60 students per year. Is that the same? I heard that they were considering starting to take 90 per year but I have no idea if that's true or not.

gee now waterloo doesn't sound too hot :thumbdown but tuition is a huge deciding factor for me :(

and for those who've already finished their applications, did you also type up the info for the "academic record" section where you list your courses and grades? from what i can assess of the application, you only type the autobiographic sketch and the essay?

just want to make sure. thanks :)

Yeah, I only typed the autobiographic sketch and the essay. I hear you about tuition being a huge deciding factor! I don't have the luxury of the "bank of mom and dad" and the thought of taking out that much money in loans to go to school in the US is scary! I loved ICO but there is no way I will go there if I get into Waterloo.

I think it's at 70 for this yr. Every year they are supposed to increase the class by 5 seats till it reaches 90. In a few years, I think Entering Class 2008, it'll be even tougher to get in. All the "recommended courses" will now be required, such as immunology. Killer! And no 2nd yrs will be allowed in! Entering Class 2005 had 5 - 2nd yrs out of 65 spots! (or 70 spots). That's a lot.

Did you just graduate this year? And you're having troubles finding a job? Yikes.

I graduated last june, and I got a job, I work at a medical lab company. But in my opinion the Biomedical Sciences degree UW offers is trash. The courses we took were all over the place, vague and non specific, it is definitely more of a pre-degree. I don't see how it can be any use to anybody unless your planning on post graduate studies. And that's what a lot of people in our program are doing, adding on a masters, or going into radiology, etc...Ultimately, in the real world, its experience which will get you through the door, NOT this degree.

Hey guys this is my first post here. I'm a student at UW and just applied as well. It's really the only option I have due to the tuition in the states :scared:

I'm hoping it's true what you say about grades and OAT being basically the only stuff they look at.....because that's about all I got :laugh:

:eek: is that just a rumour? i've never heard of anyone being accepted based purely on grades!
Yeah, I heard that too. Some people they don't even bother interviewing, they just accept.

You think that's bad, its even worse for internal students. I have to get verified that i'm a Waterloo student and than they send me a special form, which only UW students can use. Did you like the essay part? I could only fit 380 words in it. That's so dumb.

Oh well, they only look at GPA anyways.
The essay was a pain....the first one I wrote turned out to be twice as long as the allowed space. I started cutting it down till it eventually fit, and mine ended up 380 words long as well. All you can do is just list stuff, not really go into any detail. I didn't like all the cutting and pasting we had to do, either.

I think it's at 70 for this yr. Every year they are supposed to increase the class by 5 seats till it reaches 90. In a few years, I think Entering Class 2008, it'll be even tougher to get in. All the "recommended courses" will now be required, such as immunology. Killer! And no 2nd yrs will be allowed in! Entering Class 2005 had 5 - 2nd yrs out of 65 spots! (or 70 spots). That's a lot.
They're actually accepting 80 students this year, not 70. The plan is to increase to 85 next year, and 90 the year after that.

gee now waterloo doesn't sound too hot :thumbdown but tuition is a huge deciding factor for me :(

and for those who've already finished their applications, did you also type up the info for the "academic record" section where you list your courses and grades? from what i can assess of the application, you only type the autobiographic sketch and the essay?

just want to make sure. thanks :)
Hi. The only part I typed up was the sketch and the essay. The other stuff I just wrote in.

I have all of the prerequesites, but I haven't taken a stats class. I had an analytical chemistry class where we were doing statistical calculations. My GPA is 3.98 and I had great OAT scores too. I was just wondering if this statistics thing will be an issue anywhere. I applied to Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Ferris and Waterloo. Aslo does anyone know what kind of scholarships are available for these schools?

I have all of the prerequesites, but I haven't taken a stats class. I had an analytical chemistry class where we were doing statistical calculations. My GPA is 3.98 and I had great OAT scores too. I was just wondering if this statistics thing will be an issue anywhere. I applied to Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Ferris and Waterloo. Aslo does anyone know what kind of scholarships are available for these schools?

i have similar grades to you, and hadn't taken linear algebra. they denied me solely on the basis i did not have linear algebra (i also took methods in chemical analysis, filled with statistical analysis, provided a course outline, took the class in the spring, and they ddi not let me in; but who knows)

ICO has fairly generous scholarships available: one for ~$15 000/yr. and a few others for about $7 000. The catch is, they are typically awarded early in the process to those that both apply early and have good stats and are likely all awarded at this point in the game.

Good Luck

I have all of the prerequesites, but I haven't taken a stats class. I had an analytical chemistry class where we were doing statistical calculations. My GPA is 3.98 and I had great OAT scores too. I was just wondering if this statistics thing will be an issue anywhere. I applied to Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, Ferris and Waterloo. Aslo does anyone know what kind of scholarships are available for these schools?

I'm pretty sure you won't even be considered for Waterloo since you are missing a pre-requisite. I'm not sure how fussy the other schools are about pre-reqs. I received a scholarship from ICO, but I also applied in August.

What do you guys think of putting extracurriculars and volunteer from prior to University? ie. playing highschool basketball?

deleted.

The question that begs to be asked then is why has UW Optometry not figured out that their darling feeder programs, that you attest to producing their C level students, are a "joke?"

While I'd love to be the first to address my "joke" of an education, I fail to see the reason in espousing (or denouncing) the merits of either UT, UW or any others - how can they really be compared when all anyone has is personal opinion and anecdotes. Unless of course you have a report demonstrating correlation between OAT scores of UWSO students and their undergraduate institution...

deleted

deleted

Overall, I must admit that the majority of waterloo undergrad students are what I like to call "memorizers". They simply memorize powerpoint slides for course material, kill the multiple choice exam (almost all exams are multiple choice since the class sizes are huge, thank you double cohort :)) Then the second the exam is done it is forgotton. But I don't think this was just a waterloo thing, I assumed all schools were like this. I do know of at least 4 students last year who had interviews and did not get into UWSO even though their academic record is fine. Consequently, I know of 1 student who didn't have an interview and got in (undergrad at UW). I am a UW undergrad and I'm doing just fine at UWSO getting 90's and 80's so I guess your theory of all UW undergrad being inferior is false too. Bottom line, everyone ends up with the same degree, you with your great U of T degree, in the end will have a UW opt degree just like the other 60 people in your class and no one will ever care where you did your undergrad or if you remember what a standard deviation is. That's the beauty of professional school, the dumbest person in your class is called doctor.

waterloo science is a joke. people come out with 100% in organic chemistry (and then u talk to them and they don't *understand* why u CAN'T get 100% in orgo...). in the optom class i was in, the students who came from UW in the same year said their orgo class average (the advanced class apparently) was 86%. i did my undergrad at UT. i had the 2nd highest mark in my section (over 300 students). i got an 87. i also got 400 on orgo on the OAT with no specific preparation (just taking the course at UT).

take a walk through the UW science buildings - u'll see all these courses with class averages in the Bs. ALL UT science courses average in the Cs - and UT is a pre-med undergrad (having been at both schools, i can say that UTs were smarter students).

.

Don't know what to tell you about that except to say that I graduated UW in 1996 with a degree in biochemistry and virtually all science classes at that time had averages in the mid to upper 60s. A few upper year physics courses had averages in the low 70s but they were usually taken by people who were "super smart" and able to handle advanced quantum mechanics and crap like that.

Certainly NOBODY was getting 100 in organic chemistry.

deleted

to looman,

i didn't suggest that there weren't any UW undergrads with good marks in UWSO. i said the two curves overlapped. further - i didn't say that CURRENT CLASSES of UWSO are as bi-modal as when i went through (quite recent, but not current) - so i can't say about today. but for my year, yes. out of a passing interst to see whether any professors had noticed - do u know Dr. A. Cullen? i think he retired last year. anyhoos - i went to him in 4th year about this topic, just to see if he ever knew about any trend. afterall - he had been at the school for so many years. he immediately pulled out his mark book, perused the marks quickly, and agreed with me. yes, ur right he told me. no, he had never even stopped to think about it. do u think it mattered to him at all? do u think it would matter to ANY of those 50+, 60+ y.o. faculty there?



So you are basically saying that you, as a 4th year student had a conversation with a Professor Emeritus in which said professor casually pulled out his grade book and indicted half of his class as being academically inferior to the other based on the inquiry of you, the 4th year student.

Hmmmmmm. You're going to have to pardon my skepticism of this story.

Whoa, you went to Dr. Cullen to discuss mark trends?? And you memorize ID numbers to look at people's marks? I think the greater question here is don't you have anything better to do? Why are you so concerned with other people's marks, just take care of your own business and let others take care of theirs. You would have fit in nicely had you done your undergrad at UW since all the pre-opt's are concerned about is marks. Remember, there is more to life than marks, loosen up.

deleted

deleted

wow, people who took statistics that dont know what standard deviation is.... maybe the person knew it as sigma?

not sure if its the same in canada, but at my school in the US, our averages are usually a B-/C+ but that doesnt mean those corresponds to a 80%, usually the average runs around low 70's with the professor deciding if that warrants the B- or C+ average. maybe UW uses a similar formula?

anyways, interesting stuff, and yes i know my post adds nothing to the discussion ^^

anyways - this is a discussion board.

everyone is entitled to their own beliefs, and people typically like to believe the "norm" as opposed to "radical ideas", unless they see the facts for themselves. it's predictable and i accept that.

there really is no use in debating any of this anymore. it's too easy for everyone to simply "deny" that anything i say is true or could have happened.

ok - that's fine with me :) good day.

This sounds like it's turning into a UT vs. UW thread. Why the bitterness towards UW? You don't know how it is if you didn't go through it. All this "hearsay" is funny. Yea some courses are easy, others are hard. It's like that everywhere.

I'm not sure when you went to waterloo, but marks are no longer posted in a glass case anymore, probably because of people like you we now get our marks online through a protected password so that we can have privacy to our own marks. Secondly, how much support was there by the students for Dr. Cullen's nominations? As it stands right now he's the most out of touch prof there is in our school, actually he's retired just teaches one or two lectures and invariably throws up a picture of a naked girl. I'm not sure when you went to school but times are very different now. For one, due to the huge number of people in university now, the applications to Opt have increased, therefore only top students, even from waterloo, are getting in. In our class, the top people are from Waterloo. In the end marks depend on the amount of work put into the class. If someone is not from waterloo they don't know anybody at the school and thus stick their heads in the books every night. If someone is from waterloo, not only do you have optometry friends, but all your undergrad friends as well. That means there's just that much more to do rather than study. Also, maybe some are content to get by with 60's, I know U of T is competitive so you'll probably keep that competitive attitude the rest of your life, but others won't. Bottom line, your argument holds water maybe when you were at Waterloo, but not anymore.

deleted

to reply to your post:

1. i don't think i had anything to do with marks being now accessible by password only.

2. answer sent to u.

3. i've heard that applications are up - that's good to hear.

so now canadiens > american opt students ? :laugh:

maybe its time to do some real research concerning grades, trends, and even socio economic effects, and not base it on what you observed or what a professor showed you. in the statistic world, that kind of "evidence" means nothing and in any academic arena will be laughed out of the room.

oh and you worked hard during school and had a part-time job? welcome to life. i know at least one graduate of UW (my co worker) that was worth her marks, and is nothing short of brilliant and get this, she also had a part time job!

so now canadiens > american opt students ? :laugh:

maybe its time to do some real research concerning grades, trends, and even socio economic effects, and not base it on what you observed or what a professor showed you. in the statistic world, that kind of "evidence" means nothing and in any academic arena will be laughed out of the room.

oh and you worked hard during school and had a part-time job? welcome to life. i know at least one graduate of UW (my co worker) that was worth her marks, and is nothing short of brilliant and get this, she also had a part time job!
as for real research concerning grades, who said i didn't have the data?

and yes, congratulations to your brilliant friend.

waterloo science is a joke. people come out with 100% in organic chemistry (and then u talk to them and they don't *understand* why u CAN'T get 100% in orgo...). in the optom class i was in, the students who came from UW in the same year said their orgo class average (the advanced class apparently) was 86%. i did my undergrad at UT. i had the 2nd highest mark in my section (over 300 students). i got an 87. i also got 400 on orgo on the OAT with no specific preparation (just taking the course at UT).

take a walk through the UW science buildings - u'll see all these courses with class averages in the Bs. ALL UT science courses average in the Cs - and UT is a pre-med undergrad (having been at both schools, i can say that UTs were smarter students).

what's a "pre-med" undergrad?

your argument for B average is baseless; My quantum mechanics class had a B+ average, did that mean it was easy? I guess so. but then again, there was only 6 of us, so only half a dozen found it easy.

profs determine averages, that's all there is to it.

Ur way late in the discussion. people only replied to snippets out of a big volume of posts. anyways...

i'm defining a pre-med undergrad as the undergrads where the institution has a medical school.


your argument for B average is baseless; My quantum mechanics class had a B+ average, did that mean it was easy? I guess so. but then again, there was only 6 of us, so only half a dozen found it easy.

profs determine averages, that's all there is to it.

u did quantum mechanics - u should be smart enough to understand this:

2nd year biology
class of 6 students - average B. THIS IS OK

2nd year biology
class of 200 students - average B. This is generally NOT OK.

Ur way late in the discussion. people only replied to snippets out of a big volume of posts. anyways...

i'm defining a pre-med undergrad as the undergrads where the institution has a medical school.

u did quantum mechanics - u should be smart enough to understand this:

2nd year biology
class of 6 students - average B. THIS IS OK

2nd year biology
class of 200 students - average B. This is generally NOT OK.

Get over it. I'm assuming u're an O.D. grad. from UW. What's the big deal, why are you so bitter against UW undergrad? What do you have against the other UW undergrads in the opt. program? Think their 90% GPA isn't the same as your UT one?

i'm not asking anyone to agree with me. obviously it was a mistake to bring the issue up. if i offended anyone, i apologize. i did not, however, "make anything up".

further, i'm entitled to my opinions as u are yours. if u don't like my opinions, then really, discuss the opinions. why is it always that people respond in sheep-herd mentality when someone brings up a radical idea? obviously - attack the INDIVIDUAL, not the IDEA. i saw a trend that may have existed so obviously there's something wrong with ME.

i'd like to thank looman for discussing the concept, and at the least, conceding it's conceivability.

a very ambitious president from a prestigious university just resigned for stating his opinion on why females are less represented in the maths and sciences. despite the fact that the unequal representation can be shown by statistics, the fact that he mentioned a "plausible", perhaps "obvious" (i.e men and women are different) explanation did him in. but hey, who cares if he's right, he obviously has a bias against woman - the guy is a nut.

yes. and the world is flat. just ask Galileo - like he said in front of the Spanish Inquisition.
[edit: the S.I. was about the motion of the earth and the sun. i won't go into why i bring this up]

I don't deny any of your data or facts, the point I am making is that your data is only from a few select years out of an almost 40 year old school. The point is, currently there are top students from all backgrounds and undergrads, and in the end no matter where you are from you have to work hard in professional school to do well. Either way you should have known that claiming that a certain university is less academically rigourous than another would have been offensive, and this forum is not a place for offensive comments.

14 of spades & Tybuff..
I remember a student who would walk around UW Opt and gripe about this kind of stuff. I went to UW and did my undergrad/opt program there. I got 95% in Calculus. Was my mark over-inflated cause you didn't achieve the same thing at UT? I also tutored students whose major was math & engineering in calculus and algebra. I also recieved 96% in Organic... again this is obviously high cause Tybuff recieved a 87% at UT with a class of 300 students. I also recieved 14/15 on the MCAT in the physical sciences so maybe I was capable of understanding and applying something related to science. I received a score of 380 in the orgo section on the OAT - not bad considering i hadn't finished my first term in it and I was ill with the flu & had high fever at the time. Maybe UW has some graduates deserving of the marks that reflect their efforts and some of these students would be able to compete at other schools? I guess standardized testing would be the only way to appropriately guage the abilities of students across school rather than a BIASED analysis of CAREFULLY collected class averages that you would call your DATA. I really disagree with the lack of an evidenced based approach.



i'm not asking anyone to agree with me. obviously it was a mistake to bring the issue up. if i offended anyone, i apologize. i did not, however, "make anything up".

further, i'm entitled to my opinions as u are yours. if u don't like my opinions, then really, discuss the opinions. why is it always that people respond in sheep-herd mentality when someone brings up a radical idea? obviously - attack the INDIVIDUAL, not the IDEA. i saw a trend that may have existed so obviously there's something wrong with ME.

i'd like to thank looman for discussing the concept, and at the least, conceding it's conceivability.

a very ambitious president from a prestigious university just resigned for stating his opinion on why females are less represented in the maths and sciences. despite the fact that the unequal representation can be shown by statistics, the fact that he mentioned a "plausible", perhaps "obvious" (i.e men and women are different) explanation did him in. but hey, who cares if he's right, he obviously has a bias against woman - the guy is a nut.

yes. and the world is flat. just ask Galileo - like he said in front of the Spanish Inquisition.
[edit: the S.I. was about the motion of the earth and the sun. i won't go into why i bring this up]

I think Tybuff "quoted" 14 of spades. Tybuff goes to UW I think. Only 14 of spades is saying UW averages are inflated. I wonder if you compare OAT scores what you will find. If the average OAT from UW is better than UT, i wonder if it's still because our marks are overinflated.

14 of spades & Tybuff..
I remember a student who would walk around UW Opt and gripe about this kind of stuff. I went to UW and did my undergrad/opt program there. I got 95% in Calculus. Was my mark over-inflated cause you didn't achieve the same thing at UT? I also tutored students whose major was math & engineering in calculus and algebra. I also recieved 96% in Organic... again this is obviously high cause Tybuff recieved a 87% at UT with a class of 300 students. I also recieved 14/15 on the MCAT in the physical sciences so maybe I was capable of understanding and applying something related to science. I received a score of 380 in the orgo section on the OAT - not bad considering i hadn't finished my first term in it and I was ill with the flu & had high fever at the time. Maybe UW has some graduates deserving of the marks that reflect their efforts and some of these students would be able to compete at other schools? I guess standardized testing would be the only way to appropriately guage the abilities of students across school rather than a BIASED analysis of CAREFULLY collected class averages that you would call your DATA. I really disagree with the lack of an evidenced based approach.

14 of spades & Tybuff..
I remember a student who would walk around UW Opt and gripe about this kind of stuff. I went to UW and did my undergrad/opt program there. I got 95% in Calculus. Was my mark over-inflated cause you didn't achieve the same thing at UT? I also tutored students whose major was math & engineering in calculus and algebra. I also recieved 96% in Organic... again this is obviously high cause Tybuff recieved a 87% at UT with a class of 300 students. I also recieved 14/15 on the MCAT in the physical sciences so maybe I was capable of understanding and applying something related to science.

interesting. well - i only spoke to ONE UW student about this subject while i was there (after which, i realized it was obviously not PC to bring it up). he happened to be someone who believed the 100% in orgo was perfectly reasonable if u did the work. in the same conversation, he also cited his physical sciences MCAT score as being "proof" that the undergrad curriculum was legitimate. his phys.sci score was high, but it WASN'T 14, so i guess u aren't that person. his MCAT subscore also seemed to be reason that he felt he was smart. i remember this conversation well. it happened in the summer of 2002. u didn't happen to also get 8 on the english portion of the MCAT did u?


I received a score of 380 in the orgo section on the OAT....I guess standardized testing would be the only way to appropriately guage the abilities of students...

i don't even know why u bring this up. but if u want to toe-to-toe on this, fine. small sample here, but u invited the comparison.

loo grad - orgo 96%, OAT 380

14 of spades - orgo 87%, OAT 400

Notes: loo grad was "ill with the flu & had high fever at the time". as well, loo grade "hadn't finished his class in orgo". points noted.

Additional Notes: spades ALSO was sick having caught a cold that week. he also hadn't finished taking his orgo course at the time of writing (who the heck has???). spades also had to travel to waterloo that morning to write the OAT, so no home-court advantage (yippee doo)

Further Notes: the highest mark in my section at UT in orgo was 89%. no commentary - take it at face value.

As for "commentary", yes, your 96% would be considered a high mark in orgo. that suggests u were near perfection on virtually every evaluation u had. an 87, i'm sure u know, is a much different mark. it means u get a low 80 on one exam, followed by a low 90 the next. quite a bit different.

I'll give u a dollar for anyone that u find who got a 96 in organic chemistry at a pre-med undergrad.

Ur way late in the discussion. people only replied to snippets out of a big volume of posts. anyways...



what'd i miss then? fill me in on what i'm missing, seeing as how i also missed the memo on "i can only reply to posts within 5 days of origin"



i'm defining a pre-med undergrad as the undergrads where the institution has a medical school.



what difference does that make? pre-med schools harder than non? LOL



u did quantum mechanics - u should be smart enough to understand this:

2nd year biology
class of 6 students - average B. THIS IS OK

2nd year biology
class of 200 students - average B. This is generally NOT OK.



i'll ignore your your first comment.

why isn't that OK? - at my school, there was A average in intermediate biochemistry in one section, and a C average in another. two different profs, two different tests. it's prof based.

14_of_spades :

Yes my performance to yours on the OAT was very shabby indeed. You must be a better guesser than me. Anyways... Organic chemistry is a technical course. Do you agree? If you understand the concepts/reactions/definitions/math/formulas you should be able to answer the questions. Do you agree? Our tests were multiple choice... the answers were on the page. If you knew the material you could find the right answer. Thats all there is to it. Just like the MCAT/OAT... the answers are on the page. So it is possible for a person to receive 100%. Can a group average reach 80% - well... yes... a group can do so if technically competent. UW professors - for every course - have to go and defend their class averages in front of admin. faculty. I am sure you recall receiving your unofficial grades prior to them becoming official one month after. Class averages have been raised or lowered after the fact in response to fall in line with the rest of the school, with other sections of the same course, ect. I recall most averages for science courses at the university ranged from 65% (first year) - 70-73% (3rd-4th years) - not too outrageous I don't imagine.

Hi just wondering if any EXTERNAL applicants have been invited for an interview yet??

Hi just wondering if any EXTERNAL applicants have been invited for an interview yet??

Yes, I am in Calgary and I received a call today. My interview will be on April 5. Oh, goody!

Ooh congrats!

two questions for ya:

1. does waterloo give off campus interviews?
2. do they choose the date for you or you choose yourself? and do they give you a big range to choose from?


thanks

Ooh congrats!

two questions for ya:

1. does waterloo give off campus interviews?
2. do they choose the date for you or you choose yourself? and do they give you a big range to choose from?

Thanks! I'm keeping my fingers crossed :) As for your questions:

1. Yes, Waterloo gives off-campus interviews outside of Ontario (I am not sure whether they visit all other provinces, or only selected ones). I am in Calgary, and they are conducting interviews here at the U of C.
2. In my case, I was not given a choice for the date. I do not know whether that is the case for every location.