University of Toronto Application Thread

[1ive2die]

---

Members do not see this ad.

There's a rumour floating around that over 75 first year pharmacy students are reapplying for the 2011 admission cycle due to the indecisiveness about a track-in program and its potential cost. Gonna be a tough admission cycle.

I heard this too. Although I doubt the faculty will allow re-applicants to get in. If they did they would easily be losing over $75 000 per student (3 years x (14 000 tuition + roughly 14 000 provided by the govt)). Doubt they would do that.

 

[mochaswirl]

There's a rumour floating around that over 75 first year pharmacy students are reapplying for the 2011 admission cycle due to the indecisiveness about a track-in program and its potential cost. Gonna be a tough admission cycle.

Could you elaborate (if possible), about what this track-in program is and why they are having to reapply?

So these are students that already got in last year but are now re-applying for entry into the class of 2011?

 

[1ive2die]

Could you elaborate (if possible), about what this track-in program is and why they are having to reapply?

So these are students that already got in last year but are now re-applying for entry into the class of 2011?

I have a friend in 1st year pharmacy so she has told me all about it. So as you may know the new curriculum at U fot T will be implemented in Sept 2011. This curriculum meets the requirements for an entry level PharmD degree, even though U of T hasn't received approval for the degree yet (thats why its still listed as a BscPharm). However once it receives approval all the people who completed the curriculum will get a PharmD.

The current first years will be the last class to receive only a BscPharm and to go through with the old curriculum. The faculty has promised them a PharmD track in program after they complete 4 years but they will only have spots for about 10% of the graduating class. So it will be very competitive. Therefore what some 1st years have decided to do is to apply for entry for the 2011 class so they will complete the new curriculum and get a PharmD once approved. It is actually not a bad idea on their part because if they are accepted they will get a PharmD upon graduation and if they are rejected, well then they will just continue their BscPhm as usual.

So this is the big issue. It is still unclear just how many people have re-applied and its still unclear if the faculty will admit these students for 2011 matriculation.

 

[pharmacy0]

I have a friend in 1st year pharmacy so she has told me all about it. So as you may know the new curriculum at U fot T will be implemented in Sept 2011. This curriculum meets the requirements for an entry level PharmD degree, even though U of T hasn't received approval for the degree yet (thats why its still listed as a BscPharm). However once it receives approval all the people who completed the curriculum will get a PharmD.

The current first years will be the last class to receive only a BscPharm and to go through with the old curriculum. The faculty has promised them a PharmD track in program after they complete 4 years but they will only have spots for about 10% of the graduating class. So it will be very competitive. Therefore what some 1st years have decided to do is to apply for entry for the 2011 class so they will complete the new curriculum and get a PharmD once approved. It is actually not a bad idea on their part because if they are accepted they will get a PharmD upon graduation and if they are rejected, well then they will just continue their BscPhm as usual.

So this is the big issue. It is still unclear just how many people have re-applied and its still unclear if the faculty will admit these students for 2011 matriculation.

Hmm .. what an interesting twist. I tried asking U of T admissions about how big the applicant pool was for 2011 and their reply was "this information cannot be released to the applicants at this time". So I asked when the information would be made available and I did not get a reply.

At the pharmacy info night at my school they estimated 800 applicants but if its including 1st pharmacy students then its more like ~900.. But I find this a little unfair if they are letting 1st year pharm students apply again.

 

[PhArMaCiSt1]

Hmm .. what an interesting twist. I tried asking U of T admissions about how big the applicant pool was for 2011 and their reply was "this information cannot be released to the applicants at this time". So I asked when the information would be made available and I did not get a reply.

At the pharmacy info night at my school they estimated 800 applicants but if its including 1st pharmacy students then its more like ~900.. But I find this a little unfair if they are letting 1st year pharm students apply again.

If all of this is true, then its really unfair. I understand the pharmD issue but they can just let the pharmacy students now take the extra courses that would entitle them to get the pharmD upon graduation.
They were expecting to receive 800 applicants but i think there is way more applicants because a friend applied couple of days before the deadline and his number was 1600 or something whereas i applied early and mine was 50 something. I'm hoping the numbers don't go up by ones for each applicant or else the chances of getting in are going to be very slim 🙁 I'd feel much better if they can release the size of the applicant pool to us!!

 

[doublebond]

If all of this is true, then its really unfair. I understand the pharmD issue but they can just let the pharmacy students now take the extra courses that would entitle them to get the pharmD upon graduation.
They were expecting to receive 800 applicants but i think there is way more applicants because a friend applied couple of days before the deadline and his number was 1600 or something whereas i applied early and mine was 50 something. I'm hoping the numbers don't go up by ones for each applicant or else the chances of getting in are going to be very slim 🙁 I'd feel much better if they can release the size of the applicant pool to us!!

I applied on the second day after the online application was open and my number was close to 1000ish. Therefore I guess the applicant pool for this cycle is somewhere ~600.

 

[PhArMaCiSt1]

I applied on the second day after the online application was open and my number was close to 1000ish. Therefore I guess the applicant pool for this cycle is somewhere ~600.

oh sorry I guess my brain wasn't working properly, I forgot they all start at 1000 lol so ya you're right, its probably around there. Sounds way better than the number I previously stated 😀

 

[1ive2die]

I applied the day before the deadline. My number was only ~1500.

 

[doublebond]

I applied the day before the deadline. My number was only ~1500.

Wow if we assume that the applicant pool is around 500 and 600, is the PCAT cutoff most likely to increase to filter out half of the applicants?

 

[1ive2die]

Wow if we assume that the applicant pool is around 500 and 600, is the PCAT cutoff most likely to increase to filter out half of the applicants?

Yes. Yes it is.

 

[Kilowog]

Hi guys, I was just wondering, if I did really bad for one of the pre-requisite courses for the UOFT application (it was a chem pre-req, all other chem courses were really high), but I have a 3.1 GPA + a 85% composite with a 93% on the chem section.

Would I get flagged due to that 1 bad mark in chem? 🙁

 

[1ive2die]

Hi guys, I was just wondering, if I did really bad for one of the pre-requisite courses for the UOFT application (it was a chem pre-req, all other chem courses were really high), but I have a 3.1 GPA + a 85% composite with a 93% on the chem section.

Would I get flagged due to that 1 bad mark in chem? 🙁

If you are talking about CHM220 and if your mark was below a C then yes you will get flagged.

 

[druggeek]

What's been the average number of applicants from 2010 going back to 2008ish... so last 3 years?

 

[1ive2die]

What's been the average number of applicants from 2010 going back to 2008ish... so last 3 years?

1680 in 2008, 1005 in 2009, ~1200 in 2010, and I'm projecting >1500 in 2011

 

[Kilowog]

If you are talking about CHM220 and if your mark was below a C then yes you will get flagged.

Ok,

However the FAQ thing said consistently getting below C- = flagged in chem though?

 

[1ive2die]

Ok,

However the FAQ thing said consistently getting below C- = flagged in chem though?

Any mark below C, in a chemistry course will get your application flagged. Doesn't matter if it was in one course or all four.

 

[Kilowog]

Any mark below C, in a chemistry course will get your application flagged. Doesn't matter if it was in one course or all four.

I see.

If additional chem courses were taken and you do well, will that make any difference?

Flagging = hopeless/no chance at getting into pharm?

 

[1ive2die]

I see.

If additional chem courses were taken and you do well, will that make any difference?

Flagging = hopeless/no chance at getting into pharm?

Well it couldn't hurt but I wouldn't take the risk, its not like upper year chem courses get any easier.

I don't think flagging eliminates you completely (its not a cutoff after all) but like the FAQ eludes to it will put your application at a disadvantage.

 

[helloeveryone]

There's a rumour floating around that over 75 first year pharmacy students are reapplying for the 2011 admission cycle due to the indecisiveness about a track-in program and its potential cost. Gonna be a tough admission cycle.

WOW, this is so unfair... why would the faculty even consider such applicants considering that they will be losing soooo much $$$ from tuition money!

I hope that we won't need to worry about competing with existing pharmacy students.

Anyone have a legit source for this claim at tall?

 

[Scigeek]

Well it couldn't hurt but I wouldn't take the risk, its not like upper year chem courses get any easier.

I don't think flagging eliminates you completely (its not a cutoff after all) but like the FAQ eludes to it will put your application at a disadvantage.

Sorry I'm kinda of out of the loop on this FAQ about flagging marks. Where can I find this FAQ? My chem marks are all above a C. Does it this flagging only apply to chemistry? Because I once got a C- in a course 🙁 not chem...but only once....will my application get flagged? 😱

 

[1ive2die]

Sorry I'm kinda of out of the loop on this FAQ about flagging marks. Where can I find this FAQ? My chem marks are all above a C. Does it this flagging only apply to chemistry? Because I once got a C- in a course 🙁 not chem...but only once....will my application get flagged? 😱

According to the FAQ which you can find on the pharmacy website it only seems to apply to chemistry courses since they put an emphasis on chemistry.

 

[1ive2die]

WOW, this is so unfair... why would the faculty even consider such applicants considering that they will be losing soooo much $$$ from tuition money!

I hope that we won't need to worry about competing with existing pharmacy students.

Anyone have a legit source for this claim at tall?

I don't know about the exact number (75) but this is definately legit. I am a U of T student and I know people from pharmacy are applying for 2011. My friend in pharmacy has told me that this is particularly appealing to students at U of T pharm who got in after their first year of undergrad because now they have all the pre-reqs and for them completing a PharmD will take them as long as any other applicant (since now you need 2 years of undergrad at least to apply).

Man I can't believe the advantage pharm students have over undergrads. First they'll have the necessary grades and such but this time they'll be able to nail the MMI because of all the ethics and professional practice courses they take. Be prepared for a really tough admissions process guys.

 

[mochaswirl]

I don't know about the exact number (75) but this is definately legit. I am a U of T student and I know people from pharmacy are applying for 2011. My friend in pharmacy has told me that this is particularly appealing to students at U of T pharm who got in after their first year of undergrad because now they have all the pre-reqs and for them completing a PharmD will take them as long as any other applicant (since now you need 2 years of undergrad at least to apply).

Man I can't believe the advantage pharm students have over undergrads. First they'll have the necessary grades and such but this time they'll be able to nail the MMI because of all the ethics and professional practice courses they take. Be prepared for a really tough admissions process guys.

Logically, the admission committee should take their prior experience with the MMI and application procedure as well as the courses they have taken, into account. Also, if everyone decided to reapply, our chances would be very low - making this extremely unfair, thus it would make sense if the university reserved a maximum number of spots for the re-applicants. But who knows...

In any case, it seems that from the people who applied during the last little bit that there were less applicants this year anyways, so maybe it won't be so bad?

 

[helloeveryone]

I don't know about the exact number (75) but this is definately legit. I am a U of T student and I know people from pharmacy are applying for 2011. My friend in pharmacy has told me that this is particularly appealing to students at U of T pharm who got in after their first year of undergrad because now they have all the pre-reqs and for them completing a PharmD will take them as long as any other applicant (since now you need 2 years of undergrad at least to apply).

Man I can't believe the advantage pharm students have over undergrads. First they'll have the necessary grades and such but this time they'll be able to nail the MMI because of all the ethics and professional practice courses they take. Be prepared for a really tough admissions process guys.

But don't you think it would be stupid if the faculty actually takes people from its existing class? This means that they would be losing $14,000 X 3 years per re-applicant they accept from their existing class, to their new class. It just seems a bit absurd.

 

[1ive2die]

Logically, the admission committee should take their prior experience with the MMI and application procedure as well as the courses they have taken, into account. Also, if everyone decided to reapply, our chances would be very low - making this extremely unfair, thus it would make sense if the university reserved a maximum number of spots for the re-applicants. But who knows...

In any case, it seems that from the people who applied during the last little bit that there were less applicants this year anyways, so maybe it won't be so bad?

Well logically the admission committee should take into account the difficulty of the university where the applicants did their undergrad, should take into account the difficulty of their majors, their courses, course load etc. but does it? No, all that matters is your scores (GPA, PCAT, MMI) relative to others. So there is a difference between what the admissions committee should logically do and what it actually does.

 

[1ive2die]

But don't you think it would be stupid if the faculty actually takes people from its existing class? This means that they would be losing $14,000 X 3 years per re-applicant they accept from their existing class, to their new class. It just seems a bit absurd.

I already said it would be stupid. In fact I mentioned this exact financial dilemma in one of my previous posts. But we all know that faculties and universities don't always do the "smart" thing.

 

[MChow]

Hey guys,

I'm in first year pharmacy at UofT right now and I'm quite familiar with what's going on, so let's clear up some misinformation. Firstly, I don't know where you guys are getting your figures from, but 75 people is GROSSLY overstated. This number is AT MOST 10 people. Secondly, these 10 people are idiots. This is because if one person from our year were to reapply to your year, alot of the material learned would be the same as last year. If one were not accepted to the track-in program (which isn't even guaranteed), you will have the option to come back and do an extra year or two to complete your "PharmD". This way, you could get your "PharmD" without having to repeat alot of stuff which you have already learned.

I put the "PharmD" in quotations because the degree itself isn't even guaranteed. Yes, the curriculum will be changing, but the ministry of education does not want to confer the title of PharmD, so incoming students would be recieving a BSc.Phm like everyone else.

So people, let's keep everything in perspective here. The degree doesn't really matter, in the end everyone becomes licensed pharmacists.

 

[horrorboy]

I don't know about the exact number (75) but this is definately legit. I am a U of T student and I know people from pharmacy are applying for 2011. My friend in pharmacy has told me that this is particularly appealing to students at U of T pharm who got in after their first year of undergrad because now they have all the pre-reqs and for them completing a PharmD will take them as long as any other applicant (since now you need 2 years of undergrad at least to apply).

Man I can't believe the advantage pharm students have over undergrads. First they'll have the necessary grades and such but this time they'll be able to nail the MMI because of all the ethics and professional practice courses they take. Be prepared for a really tough admissions process guys.

Hey,
I dont think ppl who got in after 1st year can apply for this year's cycle, because they are missing BCH210 requirement. Pharmacy students take biochem in their 2nd year.

 

[PharMarley]

Well logically the admission committee should take into account the difficulty of the university where the applicants did their undergrad, should take into account the difficulty of their majors, their courses, course load etc. but does it? No, all that matters is your scores (GPA, PCAT, MMI) relative to others. So there is a difference between what the admissions committee should logically do and what it actually does.

Actually unless everyone takes the same courses with the same teachers in the same schools, statistically it is absurd to pool everyone on the same scale. Someone can do their prereqs in college and get a 90 % GPA and be judged the same as a biochem graduate from UBC. It doesnt make sense but they will take the first year student with the 90% GPA. This is the sad truth

 

[1ive2die]

I put the "PharmD" in quotations because the degree itself isn't even guaranteed. Yes, the curriculum will be changing, but the ministry of education does not want to confer the title of PharmD, so incoming students would be recieving a BSc.Phm like everyone else.

So people, let's keep everything in perspective here. The degree doesn't really matter, in the end everyone becomes licensed pharmacists.

Actually correct me if I'm wrong but the degree is practically guaranteed. The title probably won't change to PharmD within the next few years but eventually it will. So its not a matter of if but when. Also students who complete the new curriculum will be able to retroactively obtain a PharmD. So even if they don't get a PharmD upon graduation they'll automatically get it once the change is approved.

 

[helloeveryone]

Hey guys,

I'm in first year pharmacy at UofT right now and I'm quite familiar with what's going on, so let's clear up some misinformation. Firstly, I don't know where you guys are getting your figures from, but 75 people is GROSSLY overstated. This number is AT MOST 10 people. Secondly, these 10 people are idiots. This is because if one person from our year were to reapply to your year, alot of the material learned would be the same as last year. If one were not accepted to the track-in program (which isn't even guaranteed), you will have the option to come back and do an extra year or two to complete your "PharmD". This way, you could get your "PharmD" without having to repeat alot of stuff which you have already learned.

I put the "PharmD" in quotations because the degree itself isn't even guaranteed. Yes, the curriculum will be changing, but the ministry of education does not want to confer the title of PharmD, so incoming students would be recieving a BSc.Phm like everyone else.

So people, let's keep everything in perspective here. The degree doesn't really matter, in the end everyone becomes licensed pharmacists.

Interesting points. Just wondering though, how are you so confident that the number is "at most 10" ?

 

[helloeveryone]

Actually correct me if I'm wrong but the degree is practically guaranteed. The title probably won't change to PharmD within the next few years but eventually it will. So its not a matter of if but when. Also students who complete the new curriculum will be able to retroactively obtain a PharmD. So even if they don't get a PharmD upon graduation they'll automatically get it once the change is approved.

So I think I need some clarification: as I understand, even if the class of 2015 graduate with a BScPhm, their degrees would be "upgraded" to a PharmD whenever the title is approved?!? So say, 10 years from now, they approve the title PharmD, they would also change our degrees from BScPhm --> PharmD ?

I used to think that, we would only get a PharmD if the title is approved during the 4 years of our pharmacy education... so we would've still graduate with a PharmD should the title be approved anytime from today upto year 2015.

 

[123Cookie123]

So I think I need some clarification: as I understand, even if the class of 2015 graduate with a BScPhm, their degrees would be "upgraded" to a PharmD whenever the title is approved?!? So say, 10 years from now, they approve the title PharmD, they would also change our degrees from BScPhm --> PharmD ?

I used to think that, we would only get a PharmD if the title is approved during the 4 years of our pharmacy education... so we would've still graduate with a PharmD should the title be approved anytime from today upto year 2015.

You are correct. A PharmD is conferred only if the curriculum is changed before you graduate - just look to the States to see an example of this. Before the PharmD program was implemented schools were conferring a BScPharm and many (older) practicing pharmacists still have this title - the degree didn't magically convert when the schools switched to PharmD. Graduated pharmacists had the opportunity to 'upgrade' through additional testing/course credits but one was not automatically substituted for the other. UofT graduates will have the same opportunity (and currently do with the 2 year PharmD program), but BscPharm grads won't just be able to switch their degree over to the PharmD, particularly since UofT's proposed switch was rejected on the basis of the curriculum not meeting standards for the entry-level PharmD curriculum.

When it comes down to it - BscPharm vs. PharmD, does it even matter? At the end of the day you are still a licenced, practicing pharmacist.

 

[1ive2die]

You are correct. A PharmD is conferred only if the curriculum is changed before you graduate - just look to the States to see an example of this. Before the PharmD program was implemented schools were conferring a BScPharm and many (older) practicing pharmacists still have this title - the degree didn't magically convert when the schools switched to PharmD. Graduated pharmacists had the opportunity to 'upgrade' through additional testing/course credits but one was not automatically substituted for the other. UofT graduates will have the same opportunity (and currently do with the 2 year PharmD program), but BscPharm grads won't just be able to switch their degree over to the PharmD, particularly since UofT's proposed switch was rejected on the basis of the curriculum not meeting standards for the entry-level PharmD curriculum.

When it comes down to it - BscPharm vs. PharmD, does it even matter? At the end of the day you are still a licenced, practicing pharmacist.

I think you are getting your facts confused. The message from the pharmacy faculty was that graduates of the new curriculum would be able to retroactively receive the PharmD once approved. The whole reason for the curriculum change was to meet the criteria for an entry level PharmD. U of T would not bother changing their curriculum knowing that the standards would not be met.

So in other words a graduate of the new curriculum could wake up one day and be eligible to switch their BScPhm to PharmD without any other additional coursework. But only a graduate of the new curriculum would be able to do this, not any BScPhm degree holder. Do you see the distinction?

The reason the entry level PharmD has not been approved is more to do with the government and CCAPP dragging their feet on approving the designation. One of the arguments against it is the whole "Americanization" of degrees like the LLB to JD and such not because U of T doesn't meet the criteria.

 

[123Cookie123]

I think you are getting your facts confused. The message from the pharmacy faculty was that graduates of the new curriculum would be able to retroactively receive the PharmD once approved. The whole reason for the curriculum change was to meet the criteria for an entry level PharmD. U of T would not bother changing their curriculum knowing that the standards would not be met.

So in other words a graduate of the new curriculum could wake up one day and be eligible to switch their BScPhm to PharmD without any other additional coursework. But only a graduate of the new curriculum would be able to do this, not any BScPhm degree holder. Do you see the distinction?

The reason the entry level PharmD has not been approved is more to do with the government and CCAPP dragging their feet on approving the designation. One of the arguments against it is the whole "Americanization" of degrees like the LLB to JD and such not because U of T doesn't meet the criteria.

UofT changed it's curriculum in hopes of gaining approval to confer the PharmD degree (it wasn't the other way around), but it was then decided by the CCAPP that there are still a few kinks to work out in the program (which for all we know could take years - lets keep in mind that these PharmD rumors have been circulating for many years now) before they could.

All I'm saying is don't bank on the PharmD title from UofT, if it is truly that important to you (for whatever reason) apply to UBuffalo - it's a short drive from Toronto and you'll have your PharmD.

Will UofT move towards the PharmD? Yes. Will it happen within the next year or two? Probably not. To be realistic, most of us will have graduated and be working by the time UofT begins conferring the entry level PharmD.
But by that point - will it even matter? I know I personally wouldn't want to shift time away from my career to jump through whatever hoops UofT sets to switch the degree (and if you think it'll be an easy process...think again).

 

[PharMarley]

UofT changed it's curriculum in hopes of gaining approval to confer the PharmD degree (it wasn't the other way around), but it was then decided by the CCAPP that there are still a few kinks to work out in the program (which for all we know could take years - lets keep in mind that these PharmD rumors have been circulating for many years now) before they could.

All I'm saying is don't bank on the PharmD title from UofT, if it is truly that important to you (for whatever reason) apply to UBuffalo - it's a short drive from Toronto and you'll have your PharmD.

Will UofT move towards the PharmD? Yes. Will it happen within the next year or two? Probably not. To be realistic, most of us will have graduated and be working by the time UofT begins conferring the entry level PharmD.
But by that point - will it even matter? I know I personally wouldn't want to shift time away from my career to jump through whatever hoops UofT sets to switch the degree (and if you think it'll be an easy process...think again).

People please relax. Either way you should all focus on being accepted and then worry about the pharmD later on. No use arguing about things that are not concrete. Bottom line, EVENTALLY there will be pharmD at UofT. The new curric is designed to get you there. If you luckout and get accepted it for september you MAY graduate with a pharmD degree. Now relax and eat some dorito chips and go back to your facebook pages.🙂

 

[skylen]

People please relax. Either way you should all focus on being accepted and then worry about the pharmD later on. No use arguing about things that are not concrete. Bottom line, EVENTALLY there will be pharmD at UofT. The new curric is designed to get you there. If you luckout and get accepted it for september you MAY graduate with a pharmD degree. Now relax and eat some dorito chips and go back to your facebook pages.🙂

Omg how did you know what I was doing?

 

[helloeveryone]

Quick question: is there anyway to find out whether our university transcripts have arrived at UofT? My university sends the transcript via regular mail, so if it gets lost on the way to UofT, I have no way of knowing if uoft got it or not...

 

[skylen]

Quick question: is there anyway to find out whether our university transcripts have arrived at UofT? My university sends the transcript via regular mail, so if it gets lost on the way to UofT, I have no way of knowing if uoft got it or not...

Email them. That's what I did. However, my reason was because of my outstanding account, so I didn't know if Mac even sent it or not.

 

[byork]

About the PCAT cutoffs: it's a bell curve so I doubt it will move much. Just because the application pool is shrinking doesn't mean the distribution changes. If less people have requirements, they're likely only picking off from both ends of the curve.

Hey guys,

I'm in first year pharmacy at UofT right now and I'm quite familiar with what's going on, so let's clear up some misinformation. Firstly, I don't know where you guys are getting your figures from, but 75 people is GROSSLY overstated. This number is AT MOST 10 people. Secondly, these 10 people are idiots. This is because if one person from our year were to reapply to your year, alot of the material learned would be the same as last year. If one were not accepted to the track-in program (which isn't even guaranteed), you will have the option to come back and do an extra year or two to complete your "PharmD". This way, you could get your "PharmD" without having to repeat alot of stuff which you have already learned.

I put the "PharmD" in quotations because the degree itself isn't even guaranteed. Yes, the curriculum will be changing, but the ministry of education does not want to confer the title of PharmD, so incoming students would be recieving a BSc.Phm like everyone else.

So people, let's keep everything in perspective here. The degree doesn't really matter, in the end everyone becomes licensed pharmacists.

I only know of 2 and I've asked around, but 10 seems reasonable.

It comes down to money. They can't guarantee that a track-in program will cost the same amount of money as the current curriculum. Who wants to spend 30k per year to enter a track in program in 4th and 5th year? That's $45k more, not even considering an extra year of living in an expensive city like Toronto. Also, you might not be able to secure a spot in the program or the PharmD can be granted too late for them to make a program. (Remember the PharmD can be granted retroactively for the new curriculum, so you have 4+ year window versus the 2ish years if you're hoping for a chance at the new degree now.)

Also, if you graduate with a BscPhm in the current program you'd need to take a 2 year bridging program at (at least) $30k per year and if you include opportunity cost and living costs, it will really cost $200k more.

If you reapply, you still have to spend one extra year of living costs and opportunity cost, but tuition is guaranteed to be reasonable and you'll definitely get a spot. It's not idiotic. It's called hedging your bets and considering there is a good chance the PharmD will be granted, it is a good investment when you consider the alternatives.

Yeah, the degree designation doesn't matter depending on what you want to do legally. But a higher credential always means something, especially if it has the title "doctor" in it.

Also, some of the stuff in the first year curriculum is repeated. But most if it isn't and a lot of the repeated stuff is online coursework, so it's not a big deal.

And I'm pretty sure they can't discriminate applicants based on whether they were previously accepted or are currently enrolled in the program. I don't think they would do that. It is really unfair for new applicants and current students but you gotta do what you gotta do.

 

[1ive2die]

^^ finally a post by a pharmacy student who actually knows whats going on

 

[byork]

.

 

[helloeveryone]

About the PCAT cutoffs: it's a bell curve so I doubt it will move much. Just because the application pool is shrinking doesn't mean the distribution changes. If less people have requirements, they're likely only picking off from both ends of the curve.



I only know of 2 and I've asked around, but 10 seems reasonable.

It comes down to money. They can't guarantee that a track-in program will cost the same amount of money as the current curriculum. Who wants to spend 30k per year to enter a track in program in 4th and 5th year? That's $45k more, not even considering an extra year of living in an expensive city like Toronto. Also, you might not be able to secure a spot in the program or the PharmD can be granted too late for them to make a program. (Remember the PharmD can be granted retroactively for the new curriculum, so you have 4+ year window versus the 2ish years if you're hoping for a chance at the new degree now.)

Also, if you graduate with a BscPhm in the current program you'd need to take a 2 year bridging program at (at least) $30k per year and if you include opportunity cost and living costs, it will really cost $200k more.

If you reapply, you still have to spend one extra year of living costs and opportunity cost, but tuition is guaranteed to be reasonable and you'll definitely get a spot. It's not idiotic. It's called hedging your bets and considering there is a good chance the PharmD will be granted, it is a good investment when you consider the alternatives.

Yeah, the degree designation doesn't matter depending on what you want to do legally. But a higher credential always means something, especially if it has the title "doctor" in it.

Also, some of the stuff in the first year curriculum is repeated. But most if it isn't and a lot of the repeated stuff is online coursework, so it's not a big deal.

And I'm pretty sure they can't discriminate applicants based on whether they were previously accepted or are currently enrolled in the program. I don't think they would do that. It is really unfair for new applicants and current students but you gotta do what you gotta do.

Thanks for your post... everything you say makes sense now.

The only thing is that, if people from your class get admitted into the new class, it means that they pretty much TAKE AWAY those spots from people who would've been happy to be in pharmacy now... This is very unfair. I hope you get my point.

 

[byork]

.

 

[helloeveryone]

It's more unfair if I have to pay $45k or $200k extra and waste 2 years of my life in my books.

If it were 100 people reapplying, it would be very unfair and catastrophic. If it is only 2-10 people reapplying, it is only slightly unfair. It's not the competitive applicants getting bumped off, it's the people on the very edge who are on the waiting list (no offense to anyone).

In other words, say there are 10 applicants reapplying (generous estimate). 240 spots are available, with 50 waiting list spots. If the 10 applicants are re-accepted (generous again), thats 10/290. That means that 3% of the people are the very bottom won't get in.

Somewhat unfair, but the real injustice is not guaranteeing us first years a track-in program and stable tuition. Plus, you never know. They might guarantee us this later on when they realize that students have reapplied. We just won't accept our offers of readmission.

No need to worry.

I totally get your valid points. And you guys, in the current class, are indeed facing some unfair disadvantages. Anyone would feel that way if they were in your shoes.

But I am still behind my point that those ~10 people who are reapplying, will technically "waste" 10 spots overall because the current class will have ~240 people in it now instead of 250 (all these are assuming that 10 people are reapplying and they will all get in.) But oh well, no matter how you look at it, there is always unfairness facing a group of people... There is no way of making this perfectly just for everyone.

 

[1ive2die]

I totally get your valid points. And you guys, in the current class, are indeed facing some unfair disadvantages. Anyone would feel that way if they were in your shoes.

But I am still behind my point that those ~10 people who are reapplying, will technically "waste" 10 spots overall because the current class will have ~240 people in it now instead of 250 (all these are assuming that 10 people are reapplying and they will all get in.) But oh well, no matter how you look at it, there is always unfairness facing a group of people... There is no way of making this perfectly just for everyone.

Well there is still the big question of whether the faculty will allow the students to be admitted. Even losing 10 students is a loss of nearly 3 quarters of a million dollars in tuition revenue by the university. Doubt they'll just let that happen.

Oh and just another note. If 10 people get in from the current year there will be 230 spots left, not 240.

 

[PharMarley]

Even losing 10 students is a loss of nearly 3 quarters of a million dollars in tuition revenue by the university. Doubt they'll just let that happen.

I'm sure throughtout the 4 year program at least 10 people either fail, drop out, or die( lets hope not), but for any reason fail to complete the course. So a loss of 10 people in 240 is just part of the business. calculated risk.

 

[helloeveryone]

Well there is still the big question of whether the faculty will allow the students to be admitted. Even losing 10 students is a loss of nearly 3 quarters of a million dollars in tuition revenue by the university. Doubt they'll just let that happen.

Oh and just another note. If 10 people get in from the current year there will be 230 spots left, not 240.

oops, my bad... for some reason I was thinking that there are 250 students in each class 😛

 

[doublebond]

i'm sure throughtout the 4 year program at least 10 people either fail, drop out, or die( lets hope not), but for any reason fail to complete the course. So a loss of 10 people in 240 is just part of the business. Calculated risk.

lmao

 

[1ive2die]

I'm sure throughtout the 4 year program at least 10 people either fail, drop out, or die( lets hope not), but for any reason fail to complete the course. So a loss of 10 people in 240 is just part of the business. calculated risk.

The problem with that statement is that these 10 people would be in addition to people who normally leave the program. Also not necessarily all the people who leave the program leave after the 1st year. So the Faculty is taking somewhat of a hit.