MRU Geology vs UofC Geology

[Gurpy]

Hoping for some feedback on the two programs. Leaning towards MRU due to ease of access (15 min run or 5 min bike ride from my place,) and small class sizes. Those are the only reasons though, so I'm hoping to hear some experiences and such. Thanks!

[Guillermo]

MRU is more of a community college/vocational school, whereas UofC is an actual research institution. So, UofC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MRU.

[jazzyb]

but you can register with apegga either way so Geology is Geology.

[thinmyster]

Its tough to find jobs right now!! might want to re-think geology unless you really want to do it. That being said, having a degree from the UofC on your resume would look better i imagine and (all things being equal - cant say that they are) is what its all about.

[Gurpy]

Thanks for the input everyone.

Thinmyster, how bad is it? I'd prefer to be doing field work upon grad, which I assumed would be relatively easy to find a job in, am I completely off?

[Cos]

Originally posted by Guillermo
MRU is more of a community college/vocational school, whereas UofC is an actual research institution. So, UofC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MRU.


errrr no


Originally posted by jazzyb
but you can register with apegga either way so Geology is Geology.

+1

[nagooro]

I am currently in 4th year geology at uofc, myself as well as a bunch of friends are having issues with jobs. (graduating this year)
Although, there are some people who have jobs lined up for after they graduate. Many of them have either a family member that is already employed within the company, or they have previous summer work experience.
If you do decide to pursue geology, id advise you to try and get a summer job after your 2nd year.

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by Cos



errrr no



+1

How is it err no?

U of C will get you a job over any MRU student for summer jobs and jobs after you are done. MRU doesn't have research where as UofC actually has a pretty good earth science and geology program.

I was interviewing for my program recently for internships and actually was interested how the geologists at oil companies hire interns and the professionals at the company said that they will take a u of c student over a mru student any day because it is a better program as long as the grades aren't very bad. But they also told me they hire country wide and try to find the best students. All and all basically he told me that MRU isn't the best place for geology.

Now I'm not saying MRU is a bad school I'm just saying U of C will give you better opportunities.

[Cos]

Originally posted by Type_S1


U of C will get you a job over any MRU student for summer jobs and jobs after you are done. MRU doesn't have research where as UofC actually has a pretty good earth science and geology program.


Saying that the UofC is better by a million times because some masters students are doing research is a bunch of bull. Not saying the UofC is not superior (they have more experience in teaching it) however they are not a million times better as suggested. If you want a masters fine.... if you want a degree so you can get a job either will suffice. Especially in 5 or 6 years when this guy graduates.

A degree is a degree is a degree for 80% of the jobs you apply for. When we hire EIT's I dont really look at where you got your degree more favorably as long as it is certified. I dont have time to keep up on who is who that year in graduates. Sure think thanks and research firms probably care but for most companies as long as it isnt Le Cordon Bleu Culinary school in Georgia you are probably okay.




edit: in respect to you saying that HR people are commenting on interviewing them already.... didnt they just get their certification this year? How do they already have a bunch of 2nd year geology kids? Yes a business diploma from SAIT/MRU look different compared to a degree. Now when you have a business kid come in with a degree from MRU in a few years I dont think it will matter that much anymore.

[msommers]

I have no idea how it is at Mount Royal so it's hard to compare. Class sizes may be one thing, but also consider equipment and samples available. Additionally, consider classes available that start becoming quite relevant to your career. For example, my final year here and a few classes from last are all petroleum based. If I hadn't taken one class before my summer job, things would have been exponentially harder. Another class is particular relevant next semester - reservoir assessment and evalutation something something haha sorry. UofC is pretty close to industry

The geology community is pretty tight and everyone for the most part is very easy to get another with. As a result, class sizes don't seem huge even though 100 people might sound massive. Expect to come in quite often to the lab on weekends or evenings to finish lab assignments.

Jobs are tough to find right now for O&G. For example, I have just over 3 years of work experience at the Geological Survey, a summer and fall term working downtown and I haven't got a call back yet after applying to several places. It's not my resume or my cover letter, I had them both evaluated twice by different people at career services. It's not my performance reviews as they've all come back fantastic. It's frustrating but it's life.

Field jobs might be more easy to get than working downtown but I wouldn't say they're handing them over. It really depends on the market and how much drilling activity is going on.

Lastly, if you're interested in hard rock geology, I would STRONGLY advise you to go to a school out east. If you're looking for soft rock geology, then either UofA or UofC would likely be your best bets. Oceanography I would choose UBC or UofVic. I have heard absolutely nothing about the program from mount royal so I can't comment or compare.

[Cos]

Originally posted by msommers

The geology community is pretty tight ..................
Jobs are tough to find right now.............


100% agreed. This will affect your job prospects for a few years more than anything. If we hit 2005/2006 again it wont matter.

[Ebon]

Hard to get a job as a rock doctor nowadays.

I would go with the school that can give you the best shot, even if marginally.

[Gurpy]

Thanks everyone. I'm most likely going to go to UofC then. I don't really want to go to grad school (will already be 21 by the time I start uni, won't finish undergrad until 26 in the best case scenario,) but the general consensus seems that even for an undergrad UofC is valued slightly higher. Definitely a bit bummed to hear about the (lack of) demand right now, but it seems like unless you're an accountant, or an engineer, you're going to have a tough time upon grad. I don't really have an interest in either of those, so hopefully things pick up soon! :/ Best of luck to all you guys finishing up shortly here!

[Impreza]

It took me a year and a half to find a geology job... Definitely shitty out there in terms of job prospects. It doesn't seem any better now than last year either. Hopefully things will be way better by the time you graduate. Also, try your absolute BEST to find a summer job. It will make your life so much easier once you graduate.

[Isaiah]

Originally posted by Guillermo
MRU is more of a community college/vocational school, whereas UofC is an actual research institution. So, UofC >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> MRU.
Your cause is disassociated with your effect.

It could be argued that the fact that U of C is a research institution makes that their core competency whereas MRU's core competency is educating since they are not research focused.

Many students who have attended both institutions have attested to MRU as their institution of choice.

[Super_Geo]

When you're looking for a job it doesn't really matter what you or Beyond thinks the better school is. It will come down to HR and the person doing the hiring... and UofC carries a better name than MRU. Is it actually a better school? Who gives a shit... you will learn the exact same thing at both.

[Guillermo]

At the U of C, the admission requirements are higher, the assistant professor positions are far more competitive, and there is a higher percentage of instructors with PhDs. So, you won't learn the exact same thing at both institutions. U of C professors are also doing cutting edge research in the field, as opposed to MRU instructors and profs, who aren't and are teaching from textbooks.

EDIT: so, if you can't get into U of C, or can't afford it, then go to MRU. However, if it just comes down to MRU being closer to your house, you should deal with the inconvenience and go to U of C.

[Isaiah]

Originally posted by Guillermo
...the assistant professor positions are far more competitive, and there is a higher percentage of instructors with PhDs. ...

Source?

[Guillermo]

www.ucalgary.ca

www.mtroyal.ca

[Isaiah]

Originally posted by Guillermo
www.ucalgary.ca

www.mtroyal.ca
:rofl:

[Gurpy]

Originally posted by Guillermo
At the U of C, the admission requirements are higher,

Surprisingly, that isnt the case entirely. UofC requires 72% over 4 core subjects for adult students (2 sciences, math, and engrish.) MRU requires 4 subjects or something like that, but this year it was 79% to get in. They only calculate the average over 2 courses though. Either way, both admission requirements are pretty damn slack (for sciences, I dont know about the requirements for any other programs,) so its all good on that aspect.

Edit: I am pretty sure that I will be going with UofC though. Even if it is just for the name - it does make sense that UofC is valued slightly higher on a resume than MRU.

[Guillermo]

i have other things besides research and write up those stats to prove my point. :dunno: if they are not listed (which they should be - they always were when I was looking for schools in the states, but that was ages ago), all one needs to do is look at the job announcements and CVs of instructors and profs at each institution.

[Guillermo]

Originally posted by Gurpy


Surprisingly, that isnt the case entirely. UofC requires 72% over 4 core subjects for adult students (2 sciences, math, and engrish.) MRU requires 4 subjects or something like that, but this year it was 79% to get in. They only calculate the average over 2 courses though. Either way, both admission requirements are pretty damn slack (for sciences, I dont know about the requirements for any other programs,) so its all good on that aspect.

MRU is 60%

http://www.mtroyal.ca/ProgramsCourses/FacultiesSchoolsCentres/ScienceTechnology/Programs/BachelorofScience/AdmissionRequirementsCosts/index.htm

U of C is on a competitive basis, which was 72% in 2010
http://www.ucalgary.ca/admissions/competitive_admission_avg

Both standards are pretty low, though.

[t-im]

Originally posted by Super_Geo
It will come down to HR and the person doing the hiring... and UofC carries a better name than MRU.
Best piece of advice in the thread. Whether it's justified or not, despite the name change and accreditation, I'm willing to bet many people still hold the stigma that MRU is a college, therefore in NAME recognition, UofC > MRC.

[Gurpy]

Originally posted by Guillermo


MRU is 60%

http://www.mtroyal.ca/ProgramsCourses/FacultiesSchoolsCentres/ScienceTechnology/Programs/BachelorofScience/AdmissionRequirementsCosts/index.htm

U of C is on a competitive basis, which was 72% in 2010
http://www.ucalgary.ca/admissions/competitive_admission_avg

Both standards are pretty low, though.

The MRU website is misleading. It states that a minimum of 60% is required, but admission is still competitive. Gave them a call because I was curious, and they said that last year it was quite high at 79%. That being said, they do base that off your best 2 subjects...which I think can even include some BS option like psych, or typing for dummies, so it would still be easier than UofC.

[msommers]

http://www.mtroyal.ca/wcm/groups/public/documents/pdf/mrucalendar2010-2011.pdf

Go to pg 237

http://www.ucalgary.ca/pubs/calendar/current/sc-5-4.html

Sit and compare classes offered in terms of what you're interested in. From a quick look at mount royal's calendar, classes look similar. There are more petroleum classes at the UofC it seems though.

[Gurpy]

Originally posted by msommers
http://www.mtroyal.ca/wcm/groups/public/documents/pdf/mrucalendar2010-2011.pdf

Go to pg 237

http://www.ucalgary.ca/pubs/calendar/current/sc-5-4.html

Sit and compare classes offered in terms of what you're interested in. From a quick look at mount royal's calendar, classes look similar. There are more petroleum classes at the UofC it seems though.

Right on, thanks! Another big thing in favor of UofC is I can at least take astronomy classes for science options there..none are offered at mount royal. Geology classes are pretty close it seems. Pretty damn stoked for field classes...get to go for a hike and make a geological map? Hell yeah, I'm down for class that day!

[Impreza]

Originally posted by t-im

Best piece of advice in the thread. Whether it's justified or not, despite the name change and accreditation, I'm willing to bet many people still hold the stigma that MRU is a college, therefore in NAME recognition, UofC > MRC.

Couldn't have said it better myself. At the end of the day, this is what most people think.

[scboss]

Originally posted by Impreza


Couldn't have said it better myself. At the end of the day, this is what most people think.

If u plan on staying in Calgary this might be the case, if not it will look the same. Only reason I went to mru instead of UofC is because of the tuition costs when comparing both. My course is roughly $4000 a year cheaper here.

Not to mention the hot ass girls and the sick fitness facility.

[thinmyster]

another thing to consider would be: You are more likely to succeed at MRU rather than UofC. Lots of people go from A/B's @ MRU to B/C's at UofC.

You could look at doing 2 years at MRU then transferring..

[Gurpy]

Originally posted by thinmyster
another thing to consider would be: You are more likely to succeed at MRU rather than UofC. Lots of people go from A/B's @ MRU to B/C's at UofC.

You could look at doing 2 years at MRU then transferring..

Hmm, why is this? The classes look fairly similar; are the profs at MRU generally more lax on grading?

[jazzyb]

Originally posted by Isaiah

Source?

fact

[jazzyb]

Originally posted by Guillermo


MRU is 60%

http://www.mtroyal.ca/ProgramsCourses/FacultiesSchoolsCentres/ScienceTechnology/Programs/BachelorofScience/AdmissionRequirementsCosts/index.htm

U of C is on a competitive basis, which was 72% in 2010
http://www.ucalgary.ca/admissions/competitive_admission_avg

Both standards are pretty low, though.

err both of you are wrong, GEOLOGY/GEOPHYSICS are not direct entry after highschool, its your GPA that matters.

[Crymson]

A degree from MRU will be much harder to turn into a Geology career than a Degree from U of C for a number of reasons.

1) Most companies post their summer jobs at U of C, and at the other "Major" geology campuses in Canada. U of A, U of C, UBC, sometimes U Vic, U of S, U of R, some ontario universities, and Memorial. The "community college" campuses get more or less skipped over. So you're going to have to go out of your way to get a summer job. This is bad because....

2) You're going to have a next to impossible time getting a job full time if you haven't done a summer or two with a company. Also, the guys doing the summer student hiring likely have U of C, or U of A geology degrees because MRU only recently became a ful fledged university. Also, as mentioned before, these guys will likely hold a prejudice against an MRU grad over of a U of C grad, even if there is no grounds to it

3) THE TIME TO GET INTO GEOLOGY IS NOW! The guys who started university during the boom, and are now graduating into a recession and in trouble for a year or two. The guys who start in this recession are going to be graduating into a boom in 3-4 years. I wouldn't want to be graduating in 2011, but 2013 there will be jobs aplenty in calgary.

If you're going to MRU, i would suggest going a maximum of your frist two years there. Then transfer to U of C.

[msommers]

Originally posted by jazzyb

GEOLOGY/GEOPHYSICS are not direct entry after highschool

You sure about that buddy?


Originally posted by Crymson
I wouldn't want to be graduating in 2011

Man that would suck!! Oh wait, I am.

Fuck.

[jazzyb]

Originally posted by msommers


You sure about that buddy?



Man that would suck!! Oh wait, I am.

Fuck.

definatly was not direct entry when I gained admission in 2004.

Had to do a common science year with Geology 201, 203, Phys 221, 223, Chem 201, 203 plus math courses

[Crymson]

That's still direct entry though. You're just a B.SC student who declares their major upon application to graduate. All B.Sc students roughly share the first year.

[jazzyb]

Originally posted by Crymson
That's still direct entry though. You're just a B.SC student who declares their major upon application to graduate. All B.Sc students roughly share the first year.

But the application to GeoScience department was for 2nd year students only.

Maybe my terminology was incorrect, but you could not enter the department right after graduation of highschool.

[Crymson]

Originally posted by jazzyb


But the application to GeoScience department was for 2nd year students only.

Maybe my terminology was incorrect, but you could not enter the department right after graduation of highschool.

I didn't know you had to apply to the geoscience dept. I didn't go to U of C, i went to U of S, and it was more of a case of "oh, you seemed to have randomly accrued enough courses to earn a degree - here you go" once you were accepted to the college of arts and sciences.

[zeus247]

Originally posted by Crymson


I didn't know you had to apply to the geoscience dept. I didn't go to U of C, i went to U of S, and it was more of a case of "oh, you seemed to have randomly accrued enough courses to earn a degree - here you go" once you were accepted to the college of arts and sciences.

Hi Crymson

I am thinking about transferring from U of R to U of S for geology program for fall 2011. Currently in U of R program but feeling its kind of small here and too stifled here. Regina is nice but boring city. Care to enlighten or share some thoughts on U of S Geology program or anything related or tips there. Would appreciate a lot.

[Crymson]

PM'd

[J-hop]

.

[Type_S1]

Originally posted by J-hop
well not that my 2 cents counts, but I did 2 years engg at U of C, quit that and figured it would be faster to go to MRC and transfer back to UofC than try to improve my GPA and fight for a spot in Geophysics (which is what I decided to go into). So I did one year at MRU and I am in my 3 year back at U of C. Now before you say "but your doing geophysics not geology", the first year is exactly the same and in the second year I took many Geology classes as options.

this is what I found. Mount Royal's quality of education is light years ahead of the U of C, I am now in my 3rd year back at U of C (last year of my program) and it is unreal how terrible an education I am getting.

for comparison:

MRU= everyone gets their own samples (almost), everyone has microscopes
U of C= 2-3 samples of a certain rock per lab, 3-4 people per microscope = fighting for microscopes and no time to study

MRU= lots of quiet study space
U of C= no longer any quiet study space

MRU= money into services/equipment that undergrads actually get to use
U of C= money into services/equipment only post grads and researchers can use, fuck undergrads


MRU= decent computer labs
U of C= the lab I work in has computers that will barely even run matlab (a program I use every day) and they crash all the time (corrupted my whole memory key with a semesters worth of work last week)


MRU= lots of cleaning staff, clean environment
U of C= cut most of the cleaning staff jobs, washrooms on every floor in the earth science building are filthy (and math sciences, library tower and literally every building on campus), the computer lab I am making this post from hasn't been cleaned in over a year

MRU= small classes, easy to get one on one help from profs or TAs
UofC= packed into a huge lecture hall, one TA per 60+ students, line ups outside TAs doors.

I can only hope as MRU grows it doesn't turn out like U of C. Sure U of C may be more prestigious right now, but when companies start seeing the type of grads coming out of MRU and that they have been well equipped and been provided an excellent education they will soon change their mind.

I'd like to call bullshit on this. :facepalm:

No quite study space? Take a walk around and find some...I can name about 20 spots I know where I can go in complete science.

The computers I work on are fast.

TA's and Prof's I have came across are completely willing to help you if you send them and email and book an appointment. They don't have an issue with this.

I see cleaning staff everyday in the bathroom's I use. Sure there isn't a shitload of them but they are cleaning...:rofl:

Don't get me wrong either....I hate U of C and I go there. I hate how my tuition was jacked way up to help fund the rest of the universities shitty programs that cannot fund themselves. I hate how SOME prof's don't give a shit about you. But to be honest...I would never go to MRC because it is MRC. It will never be more prestigous then UofC and that is a fact. The reason class sizes are smaller is because less people go there.

[Guillermo]

[J-hop]

.

[Guillermo]

Originally posted by J-hop



1) tell me where there is quite study space with a plug in. I end up working in empty classrooms and getting kicked out when the next class comes in. The basement of the library block USED to be an insanely quiet place to study, with the new influx of students no one has any respect anymore. When I was in engg you would feel bad opening the zipper on your backpack because it was so quiet, now its just a hang out. There is no room on the second floor of ES anymore either, you have to fight for a spot. You can't study in the rundle room anymore because the second/third years have taken over and its super busy/noisy their now. We had a study spot on the 3 floor of ES (a classroom that was always empty) but too many people found out and now its too noisy.

2) no the computers you work on are not fast, what lab do you work in? 2nd or 9th floor of ES, those computers are crap, maybe for your powerlog, geoscout or accumap they work fine but trying to do seismic processing on them is an absolute joke. I ended up loading the seismic processing software onto my 4 year old, piece of junk HP laptop because it runs 10x faster than the garbage we have to deal with. I'm sure when you get into more advanced Geology software you'll quickly hit the limit of those measly machines

3) You didn't comprehend what I was saying about the TAs, they are ALWAYS willing to help, however you have 60+ other students that want help from that particular person so finding a time to meet with them can be damn near impossible

4) don't know how you think the washrooms are clean, maybe who you think are the cleaners are actually the maintenance staff working on the piping (they've been doing that for the past few months), but try to find a washroom where the garbage isn't overflowing and the toilets are clean and you'll be going level by level like I do every day. As a joke I tested once and left a pop can in one of the stalls and it was almost a month before it was picked up....disgusting IMO

go to the library and you will see the same garbage on the floor of the washrooms for weeks on end.

What U of C has done (and I know this because I had a chat with one of the cleaning staff one night when I was staying late and he was cleaning) is they have cut down the staff to the bare minimum to save op costs.

Did you know that they have only 10 people to clean all of Mac hall on the night shift, do you realize how much square footage that is per person to try to do in an 8 hr shift?????????


5) that is fine that you will never go to MRU, but your reasoning is flawed. in fact you don't even belong in this convo because you have absolutely no experience with MRU. I've been to both, I've seen how both operate, and from an experience/quality of education MRU is much better

LOL, you are really angry, son! one could make identical arguments about UC Berkeley - so would you go to Laney Community College in Oakland instead?

"quality of education"??? you're kidding me. comparing the instructors at MRU to those at UofC is like comparing a kid working at Jiffy Lube to an ASE certified mechanic. I don't know about you, but I'd rather share my microscope and be taught by a professional scientist than have my own microscope and be taught by some hack with a MSc.

[J-hop]

.

[Guillermo]

read the edit to my post.

i had a colleague who once landed a teaching gig at MRU with only a MSc... which is the hallmark of community colleges everywhere. talk about quality of education.

(he moved on to get his PhD eventually).

[J-hop]

.

[Guillermo]

Originally posted by J-hop

Both of these people are VERY well respected in the Geoscience industry. In fact Paul is one of the most well know researchers working on the Burgess shale right now. Also worked on a team that found the link between fish and tetrapods (although he was not in the field at the time it was found)


BTW what makes you think someone with a Phd can teach? Most Phds have nothing to do with what they go on to teach.

And for your knowledge the majority of the profs at MRU are Phds (with a couple working on their Phd) so don't know where your logic comes from.

After talking with several Phd students, their Phds actually started off as masters thesis' and got upgraded to a Phd so really there wasn't a lot of difference between a masters and a Phd

well, you obviously have it figured out, so best of luck with your career. like they say, ignorance is bliss.

[Q-TIP]

I haven't read the whole thread but as a U of C geology grad I am obviously biased towards the U of C program. However from what I hear from people who are in the MRU program or those that were and switched to U of C the Mt Royal program is not up to the level of the U of C one. They simply don't have the faculty diversity to offer the same number of course options.

As for nursing, my girlfriend took the nursing program from Athabasca at Mt Royal and really quite enjoyed it. There are currently no grads from the MRU program as the first group of them will be graduating next year. That being said the hiring process is based largely on seniority within Alberta Health Services and has nothing to do with marks whatsoever. If the Mt Royal student got the job it is because she worked as an undergrad for longer, and there have never been any 4.0 nursing grads from Mt. Royal, a remark that was brought up in a speech during my lady's graduation ceremony. Laura graduated with distinction and it has not helped her job search.

Finally, the word you were looking for was ludicrous not ludacris. Pay attention to the spell checking system in your browser when arguing in a thread about university programs please.

[J-hop]

.

[Guillermo]

I think it's OK to spell it "ludacris" at MRU, just like it's OK to pass off conference presentations and papers in grey/non-refereed literature "publications."

[Q-TIP]

Just offering a little bit of advice, spelling will nail you in many situations regardless of the context. I know for a fact that a single common misspelling in an Email or resume will get you passed over when looking for a job. Specifically in a professional field such as geology.

I am glad that you only read and commented on my criticism though, I really don't feel like offering you any legitimate advice.

[J-hop]

.

[Q-TIP]

You also misread his grammatically correct sentence, otherwise you would have detected the sarcasm.

[J-hop]

.

[msommers]

Originally posted by J-hop
Most Phds have nothing to do with what they go on to teach.


What?!

Also, are you saying that textbooks and materials are significantly cheaper at the Mount Royal bookstore?

By the way, those books are the cheapest at MEC.

[J-hop]

.

[msommers]

A thesis is very specific. If I was doing a paper on eclogites for example, does that mean that I should only teach about eclogites?!

Who at the university in the geoscience department is teaching something that they shouldn't be?

[J-hop]

.

[Guillermo]

Originally posted by J-hop


wha? no guillermo was trying to say that MRU profs are all the "jiffy lube" MSc profs of the Geoscience community (which they aren't, I was only taught by well respected Phds the year that I was there)

I was arguing, why one would think a Phd would automatically make someone a qualified teacher (and by qualified I mean capable)? When generally there isn't a HUGE difference between a Phd and MSc and a Phd thesis often is very specific (like you said) and does not necessarily directly relate to what that person will go on to teach.

I was not claiming there were profs at the U that shouldn't be teaching what they are teaching because, if you read my post, I have had nothing but excellent profs

it's clear you have absolutely zero understanding of how either academia or science work.

1) a phd=experience, which is what you want from your teachers.

2) there is a HUGE difference between a MSc and PhD programs and projects. I don't know who told you there isn't, but they are dead wrong.

3) MRU, like any community or junior college, is the Jiffy Lube of academia. The fact is that the best researchers go to large research institutions that can better support their work. That may not make sense to you, or you might not believe it, but that's how it works. U of C is vastly superior to MRU, just like Princeton is vastly superior to U of C. In fact, MRU isn't even on the radar when it comes to research.

4) when I said "I think it's OK to spell it 'ludacris' at MRU, just like it's OK to pass off conference presentations and papers in grey/non-refereed literature 'publications'," I was taking a jab at MRU. You keep referring to the "well-respected" scientists at MRU, and gave as proof links to their websites. It's obviously not apparent to you, because you have no idea about wtf you are talking about, but those guys are absolute HACKS which is why they ended up at MRU and not a "better" institution, like I discussed above. Publications are probably the best way to gauge a scientist's "respect" (as you call it) and contributions to the field. The first guy you linked doesn't list a SINGLE publication, and the second guy has listed a bunch of conference presentations and papers from the grey literature and non-referred literature. (go look those words up so you will understand what i'm saying.) Another clue that these guys don't do shit is that they have NO MONEY. Do you understand how many millions of dollars are required to fund a productive research group? It's embarrassing that your "well-respected" prof lists as a "grant" on his faculty page a $500 scholarship that he got as a grad student 30 years ago. :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: I'm really not trying to trash these guys, but you're the one that linked their specific names. When you claim they are "well-respected" geophycisists, or that they are in any way comparable as scientists to those at the U of C, I have to say something about it because you are absolutely wrong.

[J-hop]

.

[badatusrnames]

Originally posted by Guillermo
1) a phd=experience, which is what you want from your teachers.

Please Nonlinear, get off your high horse for once. I know you get a little threatened sitting in your ivory tower sometimes, but your statement above certainly isn't true in all circumstances.

I'll side step the whole UofC vs MRU debate for now, but after two programs and eight years of undergrad (sigh) at the UofC, I can certainly say that one does not become a good instructor by virtue of having a Ph.D., not in the least, not by a longshot.

While most Ph.D.'s are certainly very bright people in their own way, and experts in their field, that often has very little relation to how well they can teach an undergraduate course. The material is often many levels below what it is they are experts in, and they've moved very far past it in their careers.

You don't need to have a Ph.D. to effectively teach an undergraduate course, you need a good understanding of the material (which many Ph.D.'s have) and simply a good ability to teach (which is completely unrelated to whether you've got some funny extra letters before and after your name). There's more to teaching than knowing the material, it's about being able to effectively communicate the material, knowing how to test it properly and evaluate students, and also, how to administrate a course, none of which is a Ph.D. exclusive skill.

To be honest, I think it's a little ridiculous that the university system forces people who have dedicated themselves primarily to research in an often narrowly defined field to have to become generalists and essentially dabble in teaching on the side.

For lower level undergraduate courses, I think having appropriately qualified people whose jobs it is solely to teach would be a better approach. Let the Ph.D.'s teach specialized senior level undergrad and grad courses. Why does one need a Ph.D. to teach me first year calculus?

For example, the best instructor I've encountered at the university doesn't have a Ph.D., his job is to teach students, and he excels at it:

http://math.ucalgary.ca/profiles/yousry-elsabrouty

I've had many classes where I'd rather have my TA teach me the course in lectures than my professor (and just as many the opposite). Why? Because they knew the material just as well, and happened to naturally be a better teacher.

A good researcher does not equal good teacher. For an undergrad degree, I'm concerned about course based learning, for the purposes of being an undergrad, I couldn't give a damn about research, sorry. Don't argue that I should, because after time in two Faculties (Biology and Engineering) that have a heavy a research focus, the effect of the research conducted in these Faculties on my undergraduate education has been minimal. It doesn't get me better facilities (the good stuff is off limits), and it doesn't get me better instructors (generally the opposite, they are too busy doing their real work).

Let people go to MRU, the job market will decide the value of their degrees. I think the competition is a great thing. I don't know why so many people at the UofC feel so threatened if they are so certain that their system is so much better.

[J-hop]

.

[badatusrnames]

Originally posted by J-hop



wow, I actually had no idea that he didn't have a Phd I just assumed. That guy is absolutely amazing, best math prof I have ever had in my life. He has a true passion for bettering the students he teaches. His note packages are amazing, I remember kids would fight to get his note packages because they were so in depth. He is a legend at U of C haha.


but I guess by some people's logic he is just a jiffy lube hack because he doesn't have a phd right??

Here's a better link:

http://greatteachers.ucalgary.ca/person/yousry_elsabrouty



Yousry Elsabrouty
2010: Teaching Excellence Award
2009: Teaching Excellence Award
2008: Teaching Excellence Award
2007: Teaching Excellence Award
2006: Teaching Excellence Award
2005: Teaching Excellence Award
2004: Teaching Excellence Award
2003: Teaching Excellence Award
2002: Faculty of Science Teaching Excellence Award
2002: Teaching Excellence Award
2001: Teaching Excellence Award
2000: Professor or Teacher of the Year
1999: Professor or Teacher of the Year

Total hack. You really need that Ph.D. to make differential equations click in the minds of second years...

Basically, the guy can give the time to his students, because he's there to teach:



Great teachers communicate effectively with students. How do you ensure that content is presented and communicated clearly?

I strongly believe that effective communication with students is one of the most important ingredients of success in the teaching profession. The communication technique is not limited to conversing verbally in class, or discussing students' difficulties with them during office hours. The most vital aspect is your own feeling after each and every lesson presented, whether it be a lecture or a tutorial. This feeling is a reflection of what took place in classroom combined with ones' own definition of what constitutes the Basis of Deep Learning Process. In my own view, it is as follows: Learning a certain topic of Mathematics or Statistics is a sequence whose components are essentially dependent on one another and success is measured by the smoothness of the transition from one component to the next. Accordingly any breakdown hinders the entire learning process!

We are not born with communication skills, yet these skills are gained, developed, and polished year after year throughout our teaching careers. At the junior course level (the most challenging students to teach and also the most enjoyable!), I find that analyzing students' performance in midterms and final examinations is an invaluable way of getting feedback on how well I have taught the course. I consider their performance on the exams to be a mirror of my performance in the classroom. I have to admit that the process is very tedious for large size class, but it is also very rewarding!

[polarice]

Originally posted by Guillermo



3) MRU, like any community or junior college, is the Jiffy Lube of academia. The fact is that the best researchers go to large research institutions that can better support their work. That may not make sense to you, or you might not believe it, but that's how it works. U of C is vastly superior to MRU, just like Princeton is vastly superior to U of C. In fact, MRU isn't even on the radar when it comes to research.
[/B]

I disagree.

Grant Mac in Edmonton became a University the same year that MRU did. I had started my undergrad and transferred to the UofA because I wanted a degree from a University (thought it would look better outside of Edmonton. Locally I don't think it matters). Anyways, I disagree with your statement because I had good professors who taught at both schools. I would prefer to learn at Mac because the class sizes are smaller and interaction is easier. I do not think the situation is unique to these campuses either.

How does that saying go? Things within populations (Universities) are more diverse than compared to other populations (Community Colleges).

[Cos]

Originally posted by polarice

Anyways, I disagree with your statement because I had good professors who taught at both schools.

I have a prof at MRU that teaches at SAIT, MRU, UofC, and works at the City of Calgary as a manager of the PMO in IT.

I just wanted to highlight this as people are assuming that if you are a UofC prof you will only be teaching at the UofC. I know of at least 3 profs that teach in different schools thus giving the different schools a much more level teaching field.

[J-hop]

.

[riceboi]

Here's my 2cents, I've taken courses at all 3 major post-secondary institutions in Calgary (UC,Sait,MRoyal), my take is that courses at both SAIT or MRoyal seem to be a level or two below UofC level in terms of difficulty-- exams wise. This could means that C's at UofC students can be B's students at MRoyal and B's student at UofC can be A's student at Mroyal. If you can't make it at UofC, now you know you have an alternative.

Now back to reality, this seems to be the trend in the industry, CAs hire CAs, Bcomms hire Bcomms, UofC grads hire UofC grads. MRoyal Geology is relatively new program, imho, it would take at least 8-10 yrs for a M.Royal grad to be in a hiring position so for next little while it would be tough for those from MRoyal.

On the positive side, the guys who could take MRoyal geology are those with good connections (eg those with relatives working in the industry). Make your choice wisely..

[riceboi]

...

[riceboi]

Originally posted by Cos


I have a prof at MRU that teaches at SAIT, MRU, UofC, and works at the City of Calgary as a manager of the PMO in IT.



These are called sessionals/instructors --most of them don't have PHD. Most profs at UofC/UofA get paid on the amount of research they do (eg grants ..etc), teaching is secondary to them. This is how a University get recognized and most importantly, get fundings.

[Cos]

Originally posted by riceboi


These are called sessionals/instructors --most of them don't have PHD. Most profs at UofC/UofA get paid on the amount of research they do (eg grants ..etc), teaching is secondary to them. This is how a University get recognized and most importantly, get fundings.


Uhhh point being? I am a continuing ed student and I am pretty sure my timetable that MRU sends me says professor: xxxx. At least I am assuming you are talking about my use of the word professor.

[badatusrnames]

Originally posted by Cos



Uhhh point being? I am a continuing ed student and I am pretty sure my timetable that MRU sends me says professor: xxxx. At least I am assuming you are talking about my use of the word professor.

From your description, it sounds like he'd technically be classified as an instructor. Professor is much more exclusive and is generally reserved for full-time academic staff who are active in research at that institution. For example, you'll see on the profile of the guy I linked to above that he isn't even called a professor (Senior Instructor instead) because he doesn't have a Ph.D. or do research, even though he teaches full time at the University.

You won't have someone who has a full-time job elsewhere and teaches part-time at three different schools being called a professor.

A lot of institutions rely pretty heavily on sessional instructors.

It's semantics though...

[Cos]

Originally posted by badatusrnames


From your description, it sounds like he'd technically be classified as an instructor. Professor is much more exclusive and is generally reserved for full-time academic staff who are active in research at that institution. For example, you'll see on the profile of the guy I linked to above that he isn't even called a professor (Senior Instructor instead) because he doesn't have a Ph.D. or do research, even though he teaches full time at the University.

You won't have someone who has a full-time job elsewhere and teaches part-time at three different schools being called a professor.

A lot of institutions rely pretty heavily on sessional instructors.

It's semantics though...

Ah okay. I see what they are talking about. I never cared enough to really figure out the difference. I dont think the majority of people care either.

Thanks for clarifying though. I agree it is semantics.

[Type_S1]

U of C will get you a better job and more recognized. :closed:

[msommers]

Originally posted by riceboi
Here's my 2cents, I've taken courses at all 3 major post-secondary institutions in Calgary (UC,Sait,MRoyal), my take is that courses at both SAIT or MRoyal seem to be a level or two below UofC level in terms of difficulty-- exams wise. This could means that C's at UofC students can be B's students at MRoyal and B's student at UofC can be A's student at Mroyal. If you can't make it at UofC, now you know you have an alternative.


This seems to be a recurring statement from people that have gone to both, which leads me to a few possible conclusions:

1) Mount Royal teaching is better and students understand the same amount of material more thoroughly.

2) Mount Royal has the same quality of teaching as the UofC but easier exams, illuding to the idea that their education is better at Mount Royal because their marks are/were higher.

3) UofC examinations are more difficult and more material is covered than Mount Royal and quality of education is the same between the two. Again, illuding to the idea that the level of education at the UofC is less than Mount Royal.

Every student is going to be different in some aspect(s) but I can't help but notice a trend.

Maybe things will change, but Mount Royal still holds the stigma that you didn't do good enough to get into university -- any university. Why else would they have had (or still do, I'm not sure) a university transfer program, where the admission requirements were significantly less than at the universities themselves?

I hope the way they are perceived changes, I honestly do. It would pressure the UofC up their game. However, I foresee Mount Royal having the same issues as the UofC, that is, overloading courses with not enough samples and equipment. Students that didn't make it into the UofC will go to Mount Royal and they'll have a large influx of students without the budget to match it. Or maybe they won't and Mount Royal will become the favoured school to be at.

Only time will tell, however I remain a touch skeptical.

[sanspaba]

[riander5]

Apparently neither can teach you how to be useful. This thread is over two and a half years old genius.

[8baller8]

Lol @ seeing these debates MRU vs. U of C time and time again.

As a student that has been to both, the edge goes to U of C and by a HUGE margin.

But students from MRU will NEVER admit that. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

[dirtsniffer]

Why is that?

[tbomb]

Been to both. MRU has easier classes, but it's much harder to get into a professional school/ elite job. Take the harder uni courses for intense. People from UofC go to MRU to take them. If you go to MRU, you really have to have a lot extra curricular activities, unlike UofC, where you can get hooked up with a company/ school with nothing but a no lifer 3.7gpa.

I think MRU is for people who want a life outside school, and having an elite career isn't a concern for them.
Since it's a much smaller school, it's much less strenuous to walk from class to class and the food courts are boss as fck.

Because of the food courts and walking distances:

MRU > UofC

end thread