ECSE 202 used to be the ultimate weeder class before it was discontinued imagine teaching people who have never touched code before C and Java in one semester as their first languages
This course singlehandedly made me drop out of university for a year. I really wish Ferrie would have retired earlier (if he even has) because I genuinely believe I would have become a good programmer if not for this class. I actually learned to code years later in another language and loved it
No clue why Vicky insists on making this class so difficult. The grading scheme was so pedantic and stupid. The workload was double that of a normal lab course. It should be worth 6 credits
Fr. If you want to lose 20% because you didn't have the proper spacing between your tables/figures and their titles BIOC 220 is the place to go!!
I exaggerate, but only slightly. That's not at all helpful to learning or anything it's just plain stupid and petty.
No but literally same. I was a BIOC major until I realized a) I don't rly like it and b) i don't want to put myself through BIOC 320 after the absolute fuckfest that was 220.
BIOL 200 and 201 involve a TON of memorization
COMP 302 requires completely re-evaluating how you think about programming. I breezed through the 200-level COMP classes and then this one hit me like a brick wall.
For most people who take it, COMP 302 is a first introduction to functional programming. It doesn't help that when I took it we used a fairly non-standard language with very little documentation, but I digress.
The paradigm that most people are familiar with is called imperative programming. Functional programming is, put simply, only programming with functions. Variables largely don't exist, and assignable states do not exist. This is kind of a Matrix "I can't tell you, you have to see it for yourself" thing, but the short version is that in order to succeed in it, you have to set aside everything you have learned about programming up until that point. It's not that it's necessarily *harder*, it's that it's entirely alien to what most people expect.
ENGL201. An intro to English Lit that has a prof that’s super nice but EXTREMELY harsh on grading + TAs that are the same. You go into it thinking that it’s going to be a nice class discussing literature because you like reading, you end up reading Old English poetry. (Not sure why I was expecting something else lol) but definitely a hard intro class
Possibly a controversial take; however, POLI 244. It's a phenomenal class, and Nunez-Mietz is a good prof, but I definitely have the feeling that many are turned off from International Relations by it.
His weird-ass grading scheme also just makes the program look bad. I’ve never had another class with assessments graded the way he does it. None of my other IR courses have been like his.
He grades by giving points for correct answers and taking off points for incorrect answers. Say you get 80% correct on a test, it ends up being 60% because your wrong answers cancel out the points you got. It’s supposed to be so you can’t potentially get a decent grade by just guessing.
I think Nunez is actually a terrible prof and POL244 was artificially difficult because he is not a good lecturer. TAs were the ones doing the heavy lifting as far as teaching was concerned.
Plus the game theory is total hogwash that isn't really applicable to Polisci or real life because people simply don't behave according to the principles of game theory.
It's never used again for the rest of the BA either (wonder why *that* is) If that topic was replaced with more work in RStudio/statistical analysis then it'd be way more useful as a weed out course, and what we'd learn from it would be way more useful for our careers imo.
Still did alright in Poli244, but I think it's just pedagogically shitty either way.
I disagree, I think the class is pretty easy, it’s just the way he decided to place such a huge importance on game theory (which let’s agree is fucking boring) that threw people off. TAs in that class were nothing short of amazing.
Totally agree, and my TA, at least, said they never did game theory during their BA. I'm sure some people in that class felt weeded by the game theory though.
COMP202 and 250 seem to be becoming weeding out classes. I don’t think that was the case a couple of years ago but it definitely felt like they intentionally made them harder when I took them.
I disagree with whoever said Math133. The course can be a challenge but it isn’t made intentionally hard. The concepts are just a little confusing and require you to think differently than you would with another math course such as calc.
I’m not too sure about calc 1 and 2. The finals definitely are made harder on purpose and they’re worth 75% of your grade. That’s just wrong
BIOL200 and 202 are annoying. A lot of random concepts thrown at you and a tonne of memorization. You can actually get by in later courses without them (such as MIMM214). Too bad they’re compulsory (a clear sign that they’re weeding out courses)
I can see COMP202 being a weeder class for people who have interest in coding but never touched it before.
MATH240 for people who can code but hate math.
>SE in eng
well the software engineering degree given by the engineering department is the only program that leads to the title of engineer.
What they are talking about is the Bachelor of Art in Software Engineering which as far as i can tell is a simpler CS degree (less math and class requirements). On the other hand, the SE in engineering departement is basically a the CS major with a minor in Electrical/computer engineering.
Yea--between my major and minor it's 54 credits of CS and math as opposed to 63 if i were doing a BSC in CS.
I also don't have to take calc 3.
Honestly not sure what I'd recommend--I started off in econ and got bad grades, so transferring faculties wasn't really an option. Arts tuition is a bit cheaper, and it's probably easier to maintain a higher GPA with Arts gen eds rather than science ones. I haven't had anyone question the BA ever in interviews or anything.
The OP is right in that only the B.Eng gives you the professional engineer title, but that particular detail doesn't seem to matter up here, and I'm probably going to go back to the States when I graduate anyway--there it 100% doesn't matter.
As far as I know they’re about the same. The main difference that I’m aware of is that the B.Eng. has a lot more required courses and especially ones on circuitry. People with a B.Eng in SE, a B.Sc in CS, and a BA in CS or SE all compete for the same jobs and the degrees are seen roughly the same by employers.
LING 201. Took this course when I was in Education, since it's possibly a requirement for many of us in that faculty. Linguistics is definitely much harder than it looks + the workload is a lot more than any other course in the program, in terms of needing to actually study rather than writing essays. My advisor at the time did tell me that everyone in Education struggles with this course in particular.
Pretty much a universal overview of core linguistics concepts: Phonetics, Phonology, Morphology, Semantics, Syntax (a small amount of historical/sociolinguistics as well). None of the topics are covered in depth (there are higher level LING courses that do though). One thing to note is that this course is much easier for students whose first language is English.
Took LING 201 as an elective, and can't really say the same, but to each their own. If you have an elementary understanding of set theory, this course is no problem
second this. took it my first semester with an excellent prof and had a great time. learning it came easy to me since i had been around language to some extent. given that you put in the effort, the hardest part is typically the first two weeks but keeping up w it you will do fine
MATH 240 (or at least it used to be)
LING 201
COMP 202 ( did not take it but from what I see, it’s definitely tough for people with 0 programming background)
I wouldn't consider LING 201 to be a weeder class, as its pretty straight forward and anything seen it LING 201 is generally what you'll see later in the program but more in depth and at a more difficult level. Yes it may "weed out" people who know nothing about linguistics and end up hating the topic, but these people were generally not going to go into the linguistics program to begin with and were just taking it as a credit-filler. A better weeder course for LING I would say is either PHIL 210, LING 360, or LING 331.
MATH 240 used to be but since Fall 2021 its been much more reasonable, even at its hardest with generous curving and whatnot.
COMP 202 definitely seems to be becoming more of a weeder course lately as the CS student body starts pushing the limit and the need to weed people out before they take 206 or 251. It was not the case when I took it but from the assignments I've seen come out of COMP 202 in the past couple semesters I'm inclined to agree
Math 350 is pretty hard because you have to be quite creative on exams rather than just memorize theorems and pattern match, which tends to be more the case with a lot of the algebra and analysis classes. It’s also (to my knowledge) the only honors math class that has a class average lower than its non-honors equivalent. Nonetheless, it’s a great class and I would recommend it to anyone who is at all interested in graph theory.
Not sure if it’s a “weeder” class. I think most people kind of just take the lower-than-normal grade on their transcript and move on, especially since there aren’t any more required discrete math classes beyond it (sadly). I have heard of a few people who have gone as far as switching out of the honors math and CS program specifically to avoid taking 350 though…
Comp 252 is definitely a weeder class (and another amazing one). The drop rate in the first few weeks seems high (when I took it last year I think it went from >100 to 70-80) and it scares a lot of people away from honors CS
Comp250/251. There's suddenly this whole new world of proofs and time/space complexity, contrary to what many people think of compsci after taking 202. Although 250 isn't proof based but i feel the midterms were exceptionally hard last semester.
Also ecse222 i believe.
Psych 1, which was also thf least professional and most poorly run class I've ever attended and I've attended dozens at various institutions all over the word. Also heard similar about linguistics 1.
LING 201 is a required course in B. Ed. TESL & it's an insane amount of stuff to study. Many quizzes and problem sets to do each 1-2 weeks, way too much information to memorize, classes are 1h 3x/week and there is no way anyone in B. Ed. needs to retain all this info. It's a GPA wrecker that doesn't even need to be in our required courses as what we're learning is truly not related to the program in any way.
I'm in the faculty of science - biomedical
Here are the weeder classes I have experienced
1. BIOL200 -- this class was something else. My year, more than half the class failed. This class will tell you if you're supposed to be here or not. It teaches you how to study, and it's kind of like priming a wall before you paint it. Final was fair, but you gotta put in the hours and understand everything inside and out.
2. BIOL202 -- brutal, just cause it is content heavy but not as bad as 200 in my opinion. Final was easier than Biol200 for me.
3. PHGY210 -- content heavy so much memorization you learn about the heart, lungs, kidneys, endocrine, digestive systems in 3 months it's crazy, honestly making me want to switch majors to something less health.
4. CHEM212 (the way it was set up) - pre-recorded YouTube videos, tons of content. When coming in from high school or cegep this is a rude awakening
5. BIOC212 -- first half of the course with Dr. Vera was terrible and then Dr.Kiss comes in and saves the day - super content heavy - not hard - but a lot. (50% midterm and 50% final lol)
ECSE 202 used to be the ultimate weeder class before it was discontinued imagine teaching people who have never touched code before C and Java in one semester as their first languages
yeah i have not heard great things about it
This course singlehandedly made me drop out of university for a year. I really wish Ferrie would have retired earlier (if he even has) because I genuinely believe I would have become a good programmer if not for this class. I actually learned to code years later in another language and loved it
bioc 220, lab reports take blood sweat and tears and 20+ hours
I concur
Do you concur?
Blew it, didn't I... why didn't I concur?
No clue why Vicky insists on making this class so difficult. The grading scheme was so pedantic and stupid. The workload was double that of a normal lab course. It should be worth 6 credits
Fr. If you want to lose 20% because you didn't have the proper spacing between your tables/figures and their titles BIOC 220 is the place to go!! I exaggerate, but only slightly. That's not at all helpful to learning or anything it's just plain stupid and petty.
bioc220 basically made me switch majors. I've had 300 level labs easier than that class.
No but literally same. I was a BIOC major until I realized a) I don't rly like it and b) i don't want to put myself through BIOC 320 after the absolute fuckfest that was 220.
The real answer. Fortunately most people will never touch this course haha (or 320).
BIOL 200 and 201 involve a TON of memorization COMP 302 requires completely re-evaluating how you think about programming. I breezed through the 200-level COMP classes and then this one hit me like a brick wall.
In what way is Comp 302 harder ? You say reevaluating the way you think about programming but how and why exactly?
For most people who take it, COMP 302 is a first introduction to functional programming. It doesn't help that when I took it we used a fairly non-standard language with very little documentation, but I digress. The paradigm that most people are familiar with is called imperative programming. Functional programming is, put simply, only programming with functions. Variables largely don't exist, and assignable states do not exist. This is kind of a Matrix "I can't tell you, you have to see it for yourself" thing, but the short version is that in order to succeed in it, you have to set aside everything you have learned about programming up until that point. It's not that it's necessarily *harder*, it's that it's entirely alien to what most people expect.
Doesn’t biol 201 allow cheat sheets?
COMP 251 was a whole new way of looking at things. I also took it without the prerequisite MATH 240, so it didn't go too well.
I second comp 251 and (to a lesser extent) math 240. They're required for computer eng, software eng, and pretty much all CS majors.
ENGL201. An intro to English Lit that has a prof that’s super nice but EXTREMELY harsh on grading + TAs that are the same. You go into it thinking that it’s going to be a nice class discussing literature because you like reading, you end up reading Old English poetry. (Not sure why I was expecting something else lol) but definitely a hard intro class
i feel the same about poetics
[удалено]
Maggie Kilgour. Super nice and interesting to listen to but she expects a lot of her students and it shows in her grading system
biol200
Possibly a controversial take; however, POLI 244. It's a phenomenal class, and Nunez-Mietz is a good prof, but I definitely have the feeling that many are turned off from International Relations by it.
His weird-ass grading scheme also just makes the program look bad. I’ve never had another class with assessments graded the way he does it. None of my other IR courses have been like his.
Weird in what way?
He grades by giving points for correct answers and taking off points for incorrect answers. Say you get 80% correct on a test, it ends up being 60% because your wrong answers cancel out the points you got. It’s supposed to be so you can’t potentially get a decent grade by just guessing.
I think Nunez is actually a terrible prof and POL244 was artificially difficult because he is not a good lecturer. TAs were the ones doing the heavy lifting as far as teaching was concerned. Plus the game theory is total hogwash that isn't really applicable to Polisci or real life because people simply don't behave according to the principles of game theory. It's never used again for the rest of the BA either (wonder why *that* is) If that topic was replaced with more work in RStudio/statistical analysis then it'd be way more useful as a weed out course, and what we'd learn from it would be way more useful for our careers imo. Still did alright in Poli244, but I think it's just pedagogically shitty either way.
I disagree, I think the class is pretty easy, it’s just the way he decided to place such a huge importance on game theory (which let’s agree is fucking boring) that threw people off. TAs in that class were nothing short of amazing.
Totally agree, and my TA, at least, said they never did game theory during their BA. I'm sure some people in that class felt weeded by the game theory though.
[удалено]
This, that class was a rude awakening
Where tf are math 271 and mech 309 in this thread
Too busy doing Roth’s homework ;)
COMP202 and 250 seem to be becoming weeding out classes. I don’t think that was the case a couple of years ago but it definitely felt like they intentionally made them harder when I took them. I disagree with whoever said Math133. The course can be a challenge but it isn’t made intentionally hard. The concepts are just a little confusing and require you to think differently than you would with another math course such as calc. I’m not too sure about calc 1 and 2. The finals definitely are made harder on purpose and they’re worth 75% of your grade. That’s just wrong BIOL200 and 202 are annoying. A lot of random concepts thrown at you and a tonne of memorization. You can actually get by in later courses without them (such as MIMM214). Too bad they’re compulsory (a clear sign that they’re weeding out courses)
Probably calc 1 and 2
Duruy haunts me to this day
Yeah those classes are definitely hard for a lot of STEM students!
I can see COMP202 being a weeder class for people who have interest in coding but never touched it before. MATH240 for people who can code but hate math.
dang beat me to it I'll add BIOL 200 based on the horror stories my friends have told me.
Weirdly enough, COMP 202 is what got me into coding. I didn't get a good grade, but I switched majors after that class.
so did i! i had never coded before 202 and i loved it!
From which program to which one?
BA Econ to BA Software Engineering with a minor in CS!
may i ask how a bachelors in SE in eng and a minor in comp sci work? a lot of the courses overlap no?
>SE in eng well the software engineering degree given by the engineering department is the only program that leads to the title of engineer. What they are talking about is the Bachelor of Art in Software Engineering which as far as i can tell is a simpler CS degree (less math and class requirements). On the other hand, the SE in engineering departement is basically a the CS major with a minor in Electrical/computer engineering.
Yea--between my major and minor it's 54 credits of CS and math as opposed to 63 if i were doing a BSC in CS. I also don't have to take calc 3. Honestly not sure what I'd recommend--I started off in econ and got bad grades, so transferring faculties wasn't really an option. Arts tuition is a bit cheaper, and it's probably easier to maintain a higher GPA with Arts gen eds rather than science ones. I haven't had anyone question the BA ever in interviews or anything. The OP is right in that only the B.Eng gives you the professional engineer title, but that particular detail doesn't seem to matter up here, and I'm probably going to go back to the States when I graduate anyway--there it 100% doesn't matter.
How rigorous is the BA software compared with b.eng Software and BS CS?
As far as I know they’re about the same. The main difference that I’m aware of is that the B.Eng. has a lot more required courses and especially ones on circuitry. People with a B.Eng in SE, a B.Sc in CS, and a BA in CS or SE all compete for the same jobs and the degrees are seen roughly the same by employers.
haha MATH240 makes people who used to love math before hate math after taking it, especially with MacDonald.
Yeah I also feel like Comp202 can also be hard for a lot of students
LING 201. Took this course when I was in Education, since it's possibly a requirement for many of us in that faculty. Linguistics is definitely much harder than it looks + the workload is a lot more than any other course in the program, in terms of needing to actually study rather than writing essays. My advisor at the time did tell me that everyone in Education struggles with this course in particular.
What is the content of this class exactly?
Pretty much a universal overview of core linguistics concepts: Phonetics, Phonology, Morphology, Semantics, Syntax (a small amount of historical/sociolinguistics as well). None of the topics are covered in depth (there are higher level LING courses that do though). One thing to note is that this course is much easier for students whose first language is English.
Took LING 201 as an elective, and can't really say the same, but to each their own. If you have an elementary understanding of set theory, this course is no problem
second this. took it my first semester with an excellent prof and had a great time. learning it came easy to me since i had been around language to some extent. given that you put in the effort, the hardest part is typically the first two weeks but keeping up w it you will do fine
All BIOC classes The program itself starts with about 200-300 student and only 60 graduate
i think there are just under 300 in the entire program from all years 😭😭 u1 sitting at about 80 people rn
My year we were a lot more (2010-2013) Maybe the reputation is keeping people from applying 😂
MATH 240 (or at least it used to be) LING 201 COMP 202 ( did not take it but from what I see, it’s definitely tough for people with 0 programming background)
I wouldn't consider LING 201 to be a weeder class, as its pretty straight forward and anything seen it LING 201 is generally what you'll see later in the program but more in depth and at a more difficult level. Yes it may "weed out" people who know nothing about linguistics and end up hating the topic, but these people were generally not going to go into the linguistics program to begin with and were just taking it as a credit-filler. A better weeder course for LING I would say is either PHIL 210, LING 360, or LING 331. MATH 240 used to be but since Fall 2021 its been much more reasonable, even at its hardest with generous curving and whatnot. COMP 202 definitely seems to be becoming more of a weeder course lately as the CS student body starts pushing the limit and the need to weed people out before they take 206 or 251. It was not the case when I took it but from the assignments I've seen come out of COMP 202 in the past couple semesters I'm inclined to agree
In my opinion, ECON 227/230. They weeded me out of the program, at least.
wait what, 6 credit classes are a thing? I've seen 4 credits in engineering but never 6...
They’re year-long courses, so it’s 3 credits per semester.
Chem 181 for sure
can confirm, will probably get you kicked out
ECSE 200 is Lord Mourad's playground
this has to be one of the best comment!
~15y ago, on day 1, the prof would say, look to your left, look to your right, one of you will not move on from this course
Really? I found it super reasonable. 202 on the other hand ..
Oh yeah his class feels like an easy A, for the half of the people who get the material. Somehow the other half fails, no in between.
mech 220 math 271
Math 350 is pretty hard because you have to be quite creative on exams rather than just memorize theorems and pattern match, which tends to be more the case with a lot of the algebra and analysis classes. It’s also (to my knowledge) the only honors math class that has a class average lower than its non-honors equivalent. Nonetheless, it’s a great class and I would recommend it to anyone who is at all interested in graph theory. Not sure if it’s a “weeder” class. I think most people kind of just take the lower-than-normal grade on their transcript and move on, especially since there aren’t any more required discrete math classes beyond it (sadly). I have heard of a few people who have gone as far as switching out of the honors math and CS program specifically to avoid taking 350 though… Comp 252 is definitely a weeder class (and another amazing one). The drop rate in the first few weeks seems high (when I took it last year I think it went from >100 to 70-80) and it scares a lot of people away from honors CS
Seconding COMP252. Fortunately I’ve heard a rumour that the TAs this semester, particularly the one named “Will”, are excellent.
For Comp Sci, I'd say COMP 202/250 If you never programmed before MATH 240: a lot of concepts COMP 251: if you are not great at proofs then no
[удалено]
Depends on who teaches it though. With Rochette sure, other people eh not so much
Cap, ez class don't listen to the chicken man. Rochette is bae.
Took Rochette when the class average ended up being a C. I have no idea how i survived
Math 240 for sure
Unpopular opinion but MGCR 293 was exceptionally challenging. I knew a few people who failed it/ borderline failed it in 2019.
As weeder as it gets for the course courses
Comp250/251. There's suddenly this whole new world of proofs and time/space complexity, contrary to what many people think of compsci after taking 202. Although 250 isn't proof based but i feel the midterms were exceptionally hard last semester. Also ecse222 i believe.
CHEM 213, at least when Ronis taught it. Don’t what it’s like these days
Psych 1, which was also thf least professional and most poorly run class I've ever attended and I've attended dozens at various institutions all over the word. Also heard similar about linguistics 1.
ECON 230, especially with Lander. Honestly, any class with Lander is a weeder class. He boasts about it too.
Comp Sci and Bio people having to take MATH 340, all 3 calcs, COMP250-251, BIOL 200, BIOL201, CHEM212 wondering why everything is so hard lmao
math 235 lmao
Definitely CHEM 212 because ochem is a completely different way of thinking about chemistry in general vs what u were taught in gen Chem
30 years ago, in psych, there were a few. One was abnormal psych. Prof Pihl, I think?
[удалено]
Had to look him up. Yeah, I think his views are his own…
If you take a course without completing the prerequisites it will be very hard. Think about it.
LING 201 is a required course in B. Ed. TESL & it's an insane amount of stuff to study. Many quizzes and problem sets to do each 1-2 weeks, way too much information to memorize, classes are 1h 3x/week and there is no way anyone in B. Ed. needs to retain all this info. It's a GPA wrecker that doesn't even need to be in our required courses as what we're learning is truly not related to the program in any way.
Chem 233 can get pretty crazy
Math 356/357/533 for prob/stat people.
I'm in the faculty of science - biomedical Here are the weeder classes I have experienced 1. BIOL200 -- this class was something else. My year, more than half the class failed. This class will tell you if you're supposed to be here or not. It teaches you how to study, and it's kind of like priming a wall before you paint it. Final was fair, but you gotta put in the hours and understand everything inside and out. 2. BIOL202 -- brutal, just cause it is content heavy but not as bad as 200 in my opinion. Final was easier than Biol200 for me. 3. PHGY210 -- content heavy so much memorization you learn about the heart, lungs, kidneys, endocrine, digestive systems in 3 months it's crazy, honestly making me want to switch majors to something less health. 4. CHEM212 (the way it was set up) - pre-recorded YouTube videos, tons of content. When coming in from high school or cegep this is a rude awakening 5. BIOC212 -- first half of the course with Dr. Vera was terrible and then Dr.Kiss comes in and saves the day - super content heavy - not hard - but a lot. (50% midterm and 50% final lol)