<p>I can't believe how much of a *****-show this thread's turned into. </p>
<p>Atomic fusion, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you/don't you want to transfer here (brah)?</p>
<p>L'etranger, I didn't assume anything, I simply stated that instead of complaining about the work load, which is what you were doing, I was doing work. I just recapped your participation here. </p>
<p>p.s. Only one of my classes is recorded, and that's chem. My Linear Algebra, Calculus, and Physics professors all use the chalk board. I don't really see what's wrong with recording the lectures though. Some people would rather listen/watch the lecture again, than review their notes. </p>
<p>If it all comes back to money, think about it this way: you're paying a substantial amount of money to be hear, why not ask for every option available. If anything, you should be yelling about how only some things are recorded. </p>
<p>There's a lot of talk about maturity on this thread. Why don't people take their own advice, and grow up a little.</p>
<p>Remember what they say, "when life throws you lemons...".</p>
<p>How large are the lecture classes at McGill? I read a few years ago that the average lecture class at McGill was in excess of 500 students. Is this true or was it a misprint?</p>
<p>Class size depends on faculty and class (required or elective, popular/easy, hard/boring). I'm a science major, currently taking the required classes for most of the science majors. PHGY209 has two sections, each one exceeding 500 people. BIOL200 has the similar situation, with over 1000 people total , just that the morning section is famously easier than the afternoon section. PSYC 311 has about 200 people, CHEM211 is restricted to certain amount of people each semester, MATH325 is very surprisingly small compared to what you're used to. I have no idea about other faculties, but according to my management roommate, her classes are at least 100-people each, even after midterms. In general, class sizes at mcgill are pretty huge, conferences and tutorial may be smaller.</p>
<p>I am glad that my lectures are recorded, however that seems to be case for very large classes.</p>
<p>Drmambo's suck-it-up theory is true, but there is another way of looking at this. If you just be flexible to match your environment, then what does it matter if a school is good or bad? What then becomes the point of getting into a good school, if you can suck it up regardless of environment? You can just suck it up anyway. When it comes to rating a college, you don't rate how well the students adapt to its characteristics, but how well the school caters to students' needs. </p>
<p>If it all comes back to money, think about it this way: you're paying a substantial amount of money for time with professors, lectures, office hours, etc. My professors right now have about 1-2 hours each week per course available for undergraduate students, most of them with over 1000 students. How can anyone divide precious 60 mins per week for individual questions? I feel like i'm paying TAs instead of professors.</p>
<p>McGill Univ. has, as you probably know, a superb reputation internationally. It requires one to be a very mature and independent student in order to handle all of the responsibility thrust upon an 18 or 19 year old. Thank you for responding to my question re: class lecture size.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Atomic fusion, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you/don't you want to transfer here (brah)?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Was considering it because of financial issues with my current school, brah. I must admit that McGill for almost free would have been better than staying at my current school and losing $30,000 of financial aid and scholarships. And yes, it would have been relatively cheap for me because I have Canadian permanent residence and have heard of the hordes of scholarships offered there for being in the top few percent. I didn't get screwed from my current school so I won't be transferring anywhere.</p>
<p>Like many Ivy League schools, McGill earned its superb reputation through its graduate programs, not undergrad. A phD from McGill is much more impressive than a BA from McGill.</p>
<p>I never thought I was going to an Ivy League institution. This school is a BIG stretch for a burnout from a Boston Public school. Trust me, the vast majority of peope in the U.S. wouldn't make it through a semester at McGill. </p>
<p>I've taken classes at a number of institutions at this point. I took a smester at Goucher college, which is actually a semi-decent liberal arts school. I got A's on every paper I wrote, and teachers often told me I was the best in the class. I just got a "C" on a paper, which is literally a first. The average was a "B-" in the class. Trust me, there are schools, even 40k/year schools with much lower standards. </p>
<p>Celebrate the fact you're a genius if you're not struggling.</p>
<p>I didn't say McGill is the worst school in the history of mankind. I've heard people claiming McGill to be "Harvard of Canada". Really, is that true or is McGill just a little overrated?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I've heard people claiming McGill to be "Harvard of Canada". Really, is that true or is McGill just a little overrated?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I didn't want to come back to this thread (as it's now been a long derail from its original subject), but let me tell you this: some people, Americans especially, read way too much into this "Harvard of Canada" comparison. McGill's the Harvard of Canada in the sense that historically it has been the most prestigious university in the country (though, IIRC, Queen's has also claimed the "Harvard of Canada" "title"). The definition of university experience in Canada being much different than that in the US, the comparison pretty much stops there.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I didn't want to come back to this thread (as it's now been a long derail from its original subject), but let me tell you this: some people, Americans especially, read way too much into this "Harvard of Canada" comparison. McGill's the Harvard of Canada in the sense that historically it has been the most prestigious university in the country (though, IIRC, Queen's has also claimed the "Harvard of Canada" "title"). The definition of university experience in Canada being much different than that in the US, the comparison pretty much stops there.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No... When people say "Harvard of <em>region</em>" it usually means that they think that the school is almost on the same level of Harvard in selectivity, quality of education, intelligence of students, etc.</p>
<p>When people say Stanford is the "Harvard of the West" they are not only saying it is the best school on the west coast, but also saying that it is comparable to Harvard.</p>
<p>How naive would I sound if I said that UM is the "Harvard of Michigan"? That would sound ridiculous, right? Well UM and McGill are actually on comparable levels, so that should put it in perspective and show how stupid it sounds when people call McGill the "Harvard of Canada."</p>
<p>"no..."? Heh, I'm sorry, your opinion trumps all other's. If anything, isn't your post a confirmation of blobof's statement, "Americans ESPECIALLY, read way too much into this...". </p>
<p>Why can't the Harvard comparison be one that's truly just of prestige? Seems completely plausible, especially when you factor in that most people place Harvard on some over exaggerated pedestal. I have a good friend who's at Harvard, and JUST last night he was telling me how it's almost like a circus over there. People are constantly taking tours, and photos, and commenting on everything as if it wasn't just a school with history. His direct quote is this, "people point and and say stuff like, 'these buildings are sooo old...', but, it's f!$ked up because I goto school here, I live in that building; people forget that first and foremost, this is a school."</p>
<p>p.s. atomicfusion I don't think you'd get a scholarship. McGill doesn't throw it's money around, especially not to Canadians. For all I know, you could be brilliant, however it's near IMPOSSIBLE to get a scholarship here (especially as a transfer). </p>
<p>prime example: my friend Anand. He finished high school with a 98% average, got accepted everywhere except Harvard (notable schools include the Indian Institute of Technology, Stanford with a scholarship, Cornell and a few others). Because of financial constraints he's at McGill, with no offer of money. Stanford even offered him money...</p>
<p>Atomic fusion, did Stanford offer you money? Stanford, the Harvard of the West?</p>
<p>IIT is considered better than even MIT, by the way.</p>
<p>The U of Michigan/McGill comparison isn't really an insult. U of M is better than McGill, in my opinion (except for certain hard sciences). In fact, U of M DOES have shirts that say "Harvard: The University of Michigan of the East." But their joking, too.</p>
<p>acceptance to MIT is over 10% and this is easy compare to IIT, also some MIT applicants arent qualified.. there are even SAT Math 500 applying there..</p>
<p>Um, i could see stanford being the harvard of the west, as it is easily one of the top 5 most prestigious Universities in the world, and one of the best.</p>
<p>McGill is not the harvard of canada.
It is just an expression. McGill is the best known in canada. Harvard is the best known in the US (or the world for that matter)</p>
<p>But yeah, i would say that McGill is in no way comparable to Harvard. I mean yes it is a good school (mcgill that is), but even for grad school, harvard is in a whole other tier (i would say with berkeley, stanford, uchicago, MIT, and maybe columbia. Ide probably put them in the highest tier overall for grad schools.)</p>
<p>But stanford is much better than IIT.
Yes IIT is good at what they do. Excellent at what they do.
But stanford is arguably just as good at what IIT does, except stanford is also good at everything else (basically)</p>
<p>BIGTWIX, what the h3ll are you talking about?! IIT graduates get their picks at the top doctoral programs anywhere. Stanford students, not so much. Only the top of the top there get their pick, where as even the lower ranked IIT grads can go anywhere. </p>
<p>Also, please stop commenting on behalf, or against McGill without actually coming here. Just because you heard it, or read it, or whatever'ed it somewhere, doesn't mean you actually know. </p>
<p>p.s. IIT is an institute of technology, where as Stanford is a liberal arts school that also has an engineering faculty. IIT is better than Stanford at everything IIT does. To say Stanford is better at everything else would be a moot point, no? Of course Stanford's Russian Literature program is going to be better than IIT's....:rolls eyes:</p>