|
|
Rank: Frosh
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/7/2008
Posts: 14
|
Riverpeth wrote:
See, now this is some good debating, cause as I said I see your side of the arguement as well. lol, why cant all debates go forward this peacefully. and ya, I like your idea of limiting the number of EC's, or simply having stricter teacher involvement in each group so that each club is indeed a time consuming venture.
i think the lack of peacefulness was mainly due to some outlandish and un-researched comments made by certain ppl... Limiting ECs is a good idea, simply because, people will hopefully pick and choose. This culture of medschool/lawschool/dentistry/<insert hard-to-get-into-post grad program> drives HighSchool students. This is just crap. In high-school, you may have an inkling as to what you want to do, and even a loose goal, but trust me, you dont KNOW that you want to be a Ortho/Oncology Surgeon. But since the culture exists, bee-lining to this goal involves packing on the ECs as if you're at an all-you-can-eat. I guess the only good advice anyone can give...is that its not the quantity, but the quality; and the one way to monitor this is via a Supp App, which asks you questions where you can hopefully draw on your experience...and prove to someone that you were really committed.
|
|
Rank: Senior Student
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/6/2008
Posts: 99
Location: Waterloo
|
Because most programs want well-rounded people who have given back to their community rather than people who are really good at reading and regurgitating information, I think the EC requirements for some programs make a lot of sense. They provide another level of competition in just being accepted, and they somewhat ensure that people who graduate from the program can handle real life, not just school-life. Social skills and passions for things besides your program can only help you in life. Balancing them can be a struggle, but that's part of what makes university so demanding.
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/4/2008
Posts: 1,210
|
^agreed. I think marks should be the priority in determining who gets in but a strong EC component should also be essential, because when you're in the job market or even within university you're going to have to do much more than just study all day. Interpersonal skills, and the ability to balance marks and involvement and work is absolutely essential to be successful.
|
|
Rank: Senior Student
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/17/2008
Posts: 92
Location: Bowmanville
|
I agree to an extent. I think it's harsh to judge people who participate in a lot of extracurriculars as "out to gain something for themselves," but I understand where you're coming from.
For me, it was frustrating that I've participated in so many extracurriculars and volunteering, but I was given the impression it wasn't the right "type," if that makes any sense. I felt (and still do, somewhat) that being in Drama Club and Choir and playing on the field hockey team, etc. wasn't treated with the same importance as Student Council, and that frustrates me. I've watched many students from my high school (many of my close friends) get scholarships because they've volunteered at a hospital, or as a camp counsellor or something - and in many cases, I've contributed just as much (if not significanty more so) time as they have.
Anyway, I'm done ranting. I'm trying to be chill about the whole situation, but it's frustrating. I just find it hard to understand.
By no means do I think that social awareness means people are out to gain something though - that's excessive, and frankly, it's sad that opinions of our generation have come to that.
|
|
Rank: Frosh
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/25/2008
Posts: 28
|
To the above poster ^^^^ If it makes you feel better yours are the type of ecs I respect. You did what you WANTED to be happy. I have yet to find anyone on student council who joined it to make the school better. For that matter I suspect that I give more of my money to charity than anyone who joined clubs like Free the Children. I honestly think the majority of ppl who do this, do it for personal gain rather than personal satisfaction, and I don't think people should be rewarded for tactics like that.
|
|
Rank: Senior Student
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/6/2008
Posts: 52
Location: British Columbia
|
Not only are EC's arbitrary, but grades are too. There can be a huge mark discrepancy from different teachers of the same school even. This whole university/scholarship acceptances are very subjective; there are many instances where deserving people get rejected and less deserving people get accepted. Sorry to be a pessimist, but I don't think there is a universally fair way of evaluating the applicants no matter how we try to 'improve' the process (eg. by removing EC component). I agree with you guys though on how it can be frustrating at times.
UBC Bachelor of Science 2012 — Major in Computer Science
|
|
Rank: Senior Student
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/20/2008
Posts: 183
Location: Greater Toronto Area
|
Quote:Not only are EC's arbitrary, but grades are too. There can be a huge mark discrepancy from different teachers of the same school even. This whole university/scholarship acceptances are very subjective; there are many instances where deserving people get rejected and less deserving people get accepted. Sorry to be a pessimist, but I don't think there is a universally fair way of evaluating the applicants no matter how we try to 'improve' the process (eg. by removing EC component). I agree with you guys though on how it can be frustrating at times. Ontario should have a standardized testing system. Some of the course marks are SO subjective that a student can get a 70 with one teacher, but a 90 with another, with the same work.
UTSG Rotman Commerce (Victoria College) 2012
|
|
Rank: Valedictorian
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/20/2008
Posts: 558
|
If we're talking about standardization we might as well standardize the whole country. US and their SATs are the smart way to go.
UWO 2012
|
|
Rank: Senior Student
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/20/2008
Posts: 183
Location: Greater Toronto Area
|
Quote:If we're talking about standardization we might as well standardize the whole country. US and their SATs are the smart way to go. Exactly. I'm sick and tired of seeing "less-than-average" students getting 90s and 80s in subjects like english and other arts courses because they are buddy-buddy with the teacher.
UTSG Rotman Commerce (Victoria College) 2012
|
|
Rank: Student Body Vice-President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/4/2008
Posts: 955
Location: Alberta
|
bimmer35 wrote:Quote:If we're talking about standardization we might as well standardize the whole country. US and their SATs are the smart way to go. Exactly. I'm sick and tired of seeing "less-than-average" students getting 90s and 80s in subjects like english and other arts courses because they are buddy-buddy with the teacher. Move to Alberta. With our 50% government diploma exams, that can be bell curved if the average is too high, no less than average student's are getting high marks.
Taiyab wrote: Is it me, or is Karla Homolka gorgeous! Lamoid wrote: SHE HAS A KILLER BODY.
|
|
Rank: Frosh
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/27/2008
Posts: 26
|
I partly agree. ECs should count for something, but don't know them just for university. I know this is more platitude than practical advice. And I also know there's no way for unviersities to tell whether you enjoy it or not...
A lot of my friends started new clubs just so that they could be the president or leader in some organization. It is sickening. Especially, if the clubs themselves have no idea about the issue they are trying to solve.
Eg. I feel sick when I hear people talk about how some countries are "bad" because they have low wages. Well, go and take AP Economics. When you have a billion people in China and unemployment rates of 20-30% and you wonder why people earn about $2Y (25 cents CAD) per hour as a waiter... then you're either dumb or ignorant.
Our Amnesty International complains about how monks are treated in Tibet. Well, big deal. The reason why the natives in Canada are no longer treated poorly is beacause we force them into reserves. There isn't a thing called "fair" in life, if we don't expect it here, in Europe, in the US, why should we expect it in China?
I can't stand clubs which deal with such trivial and irresolvable issues while at the same time flaunting their importance.
ECs are only positive when they are PRACTICAL ECs.
Sport teams. Business Clubs. Debating Clubs. Work. Volunteering at Summer Camps. None of those "social awareness" stuff.
|
|
Rank: Student Council
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/22/2008
Posts: 412
Location: Kingston, ON
|
Caesar wrote:
<snip>
the natives in Canada are no longer treated poorly <snip> beacause we force them into reserves. <snip>
ORLY? On the subject of EC's they should count.. a student is more than just bare #s. Also, standardized testing needs to happen in canada, stupid ontario kids get into Queen's et al and then get their dreams shattered when they realize that their 90% HS essay isn't even worth a 70 at university.
BAH '08 (Queen's) MA'11 (Queen's)
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/4/2008
Posts: 1,210
|
how are business, debating, sports, etc. clubs practical? they build your skills in negotiation or athletic abilities but they don't really contribute anything back. i completely disagree with you regarding the 'social awareness stuff' as you put it. Our school managed to put on a human rights campaign and raised a significant amount of money and awareness for various humanitarian organizations helping people who need it in some of the worse afflicted areas in the world. These things are highly valuable, far more than something like DECA or Debate I'd say.
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/4/2008
Posts: 1,210
|
CRAZYBUBBA wrote:Caesar wrote:
<snip>
the natives in Canada are no longer treated poorly <snip> beacause we force them into reserves. <snip>
ORLY? On the subject of EC's they should count.. a student is more than just bare #s. Also, standardized testing needs to happen in canada, stupid ontario kids get into Queen's et al and then get their dreams shattered when they realize that their 90% HS essay isn't even worth a 70 at university. but there are some things that can't really be tested in a set amount of time. how do you test someone's ability to do research or write a 20 page essay in 2 or 3 hours? or what about someone's ability to conduct, plan, carry out, and analyse a wet lab? (we do dry labs too but you don't learn as much). i agree that it's unfair how subjective some courses and schools can be, but at the same time 1) some universities like UW already take into account some degree of school ranking based on the past experiences and results of people from your school and 2) university itself will deal with you. if you got a 90 with some easy teacher in an easy school and someone else got an 85 with a much harder situation, guess who is likely to do better in university? People with artificially inflated marks will not be able to keep that up while in uni so i guess the system deals with that in that regard
|
|
Rank: Student Council
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/22/2008
Posts: 412
Location: Kingston, ON
|
Redrose27 wrote:
[1.]but there are some things that can't really be tested in a set amount of time. <snip>
[2.]People with artificially inflated marks will not be able to keep that up while in uni so i guess the system deals with that in that regard
1. Agreed, but surely anything is better than what we have now? It would just be one of many factors. 2. True, but that shouldn't be happening in the first place.
BAH '08 (Queen's) MA'11 (Queen's)
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/4/2008
Posts: 1,210
|
i can understand standardized testing for things like math or chemistry or physics but with things like english or politics or history or even biology there are far too many other factors to take into consideration. rote memorization or problem solving isn't that applicable there---your ability to analyse, derive, research, write, link, and compose in these courses is where you should be marked on. I've taken many history courses and i don't think we've ever had a test on dates or times and such, but i do know some people who have their history tests almost all based upon "what happened on June 28, 1854" or some other date, which really means nothing ultimately in the end. I can't see standardized tests truly being able to mark you in courses that require the abilities i've mentioned above in a relevant enough degree. Math and some science courses are different.
|
|
Rank: Student Council
Groups: Member
Joined: 5/22/2008
Posts: 412
Location: Kingston, ON
|
Redrose27 wrote:[w]ith things like english or politics or history or even biology there are far too many other factors to take into consideration. rote memorization or problem solving isn't that applicable there---your ability to analyse, derive, research, write, link, and compose in these courses is where you should be marked on. I don't think that it's that bad, they do a decent job. Analysis: There's a reading comprehension section of the SAT (ie; read a passage and tell us things), and a word analogies section see patterns with the words and anticipate the best match). and the ssat has a part where you write an essay. But you're totally right, I think that research skills are paramount and there is no perfect way to judge that.
BAH '08 (Queen's) MA'11 (Queen's)
|
|
Rank: Student Body Vice-President
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/5/2008
Posts: 926
Location: Edmonton, AB
|
IB does standardized testing that does an incredibly good job of covering a variety of things. So does Alberta diplomas, in my opinion. I think standardized testing is very important and something that should be done nationally.
University of Alberta - Mechanical Engineering '11
|
|
Rank: Frosh
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/27/2008
Posts: 26
|
That's why on the AP World History Exam, there are many different types of M/Cs and different types of essays. There's simply no way writing a test will fully evaluate everything you've learned during the course. But, of course, tests are the most practical and cheapest methods of evaluating.
Just as for Chemistry no one bothers to test every single person on their lab skills by them doing a lab. For Math and Physics, the tests doesn't distinguish whether or not you understand the concepts or just know how to do the questions...
If you don't think tests are good enough for English, History, Biology... how would you evaluate a person's competency in those areas?
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/4/2008
Posts: 1,210
|
research projects, a year's worth of labs conducted and analysed (in biology's case). The ability to research a topic for several months, use credible sources (academic journals as opposed to just online browsing), establish a thesis and prove your point through academic argumentation---those are what you should be judged upon for things like history. A test has no way of accurately assessing that. writing an essay on a subject is a very superficial and at the surface way of assessing a person's ability to understand, research, debate, and make a case for something they are trying to prove. so projects should be a large component of a person's mark as should timed essays.
|
|
