Schols Schols Schols, information and venting thread.

Hollzy · 12-12-2012 10:14pm

And guineylab, I know how you feel! I was annoyed enough that a few years ago you could get summer exam exemptions if you got 2.1s and now they're bringing in all these new rules to make it even harder...

bscm · 12-12-2012 10:36pm

Only good thing for me is that achieving schols is like dangling the last carrot on Earth in front of a starving, erratic donkey...

Commuting around 95km a day and having another bank loan for the reg fee really makes a girl desperate to live on campus with fees paid

ride-the-spiral · 12-12-2012 10:38pm

Thanks for that bottleopener, although I already knew about having to get 70% in two of the papers. It's actually a college-wide thing they brought in this year. My main concern was that physics is the one that I'm more likely to go under 65% for, so as opposed to being able to get as low as 40 in physics if I was to have an average or 85 in the other two, I'd have to get 65 and still get over 70 in each of the others. That being said I'm not sure how much of a problem it is, as I highly doubt I'd get an average of over 70 and simultaneously not satisfy these criteria.

I know how you feel for physics. It really is ridiculously time consuming, even though each (sub)module only really counts up to 2 credits. God, I could rant about the school of physics all day. :pac:

Hollzy · 12-12-2012 10:39pm

That's quite the incentive alright! I don't get a grant because my dad owns a small business and having me in college puts a lot of pressure on him

So that's my big incentive! I'm still not overly hopeful though... I feel like I'm getting work done and then I look at the exam papers and I feel like I've achieved nothing.

Just to be clear, this is a reply to bscm!

stealinhorses · 12-12-2012 11:02pm

I wish physics labs counted towards schols. For chemistry, I've pretty much bagged around 20% just from the lab reports. My physics ones weren't nearly as good (read as: I got destroyed in the interview), but it would have been so much better than relying on pure luck with the questions in the exam :P.

bscm · 12-12-2012 11:05pm

ride-the-spiral wrote: »

I know how you feel for physics. It really is ridiculously time consuming, even though each (sub)module only really counts up to 2 credits. God, I could rant about the school of physics all day. :pac:

Physics, as much as I love it, is a pain in the backside at the moment

I know that the "oh, if you definitely end up with a wrong answer, just explain that you know it's wrong..." advice won't apply to most of my answers... I'm the type of person who can somehow turn a two variable equation into something with four variables and still have no idea how I arrived there...

ride-the-spiral · 12-12-2012 11:17pm

Yeah those interviews are absolutely cruel, but I would've put much more effort into labs if it counted towards schols, so I might've done better. Physics really depends way too much on luck. You study an entire course of thermodynamics or whatever, and it boils down to a single choice of question between two. With the maths modules, you know where you stand a lot better with what topics you need to know.

Yeah it can be quite hard to explain why something is wrong, I think I'd rather spend my time finding out what mistake I made than trying to figure out how I can say why it's wrong.

How's Zhang's electricity module actually? Looking at the papers, I'm glad I don't do it.

bscm · 12-12-2012 11:22pm

Circuits started off good, thought it was easier than electromag from last year... then after reading week things started going a bit downhill. I'm sure if I do a bit of revision it'll be ok, but for the past few lectures I've been a bit lost.

stealinhorses · 12-12-2012 11:28pm

ride-the-spiral wrote: »

How's Zhang's electricity module actually? Looking at the papers, I'm glad I don't do it.

95% of the class can't do DC nodal/mesh analysis, which was covered by the end of the third lecture. Since then we've moved onto "solving" AC problems which consists of people asking each other what phasors are and what impedance means... for the past month or so.

Hollzy · 14-12-2012 4:47pm

Feeling marginally better about the biochemistry now... Someone I know was lucky enough to get her hands on the elusive "The Vital Force" which is highly recommended for the metabolism special topic. She let me have it for an hour or two and I photocopied everything I needed from it. So feeling a little better equipped!

JoeCalone · 16-12-2012 9:19pm

Just wondering if there's any actual sample answers to go with the sample papers? Or if anyone knows something similar to look at? Thanks!

Hollzy · 16-12-2012 10:52pm

I highly doubt it. Some lecturers are willing to correct essays for you but it's a bit late for that now

Hollzy · 17-12-2012 7:19pm

I'm starting to think I post on this thread too much!

Anyway, I retract what I was saying about having to get at least 65% in everything for science. They did say that was being brought in for the science this year at the talk I attended but none of them were in science and feeling optimistic, I e-mailed Dan Ferrick about it. He said it's not true.

MrSnrub · 17-12-2012 7:28pm

Hollzy wrote: »

I'm starting to think I post on this thread too much!

Anyway, I retract what I was saying about having to get at least 65% in everything for science. They did say that was being brought in for the science this year at the talk I attended but none of them were in science and feeling optimistic, I e-mailed Dan Ferrick about it. He said it's not true.

I dont have much faith in the SU being right about stuff though.

Hollzy · 17-12-2012 7:35pm

I like Ferrick though... And by right they'd have to say more about it if they were bringing it in, wouldn't they? Or put it on the website at least. It's very possible that they wouldn't do that though

Information tends not to be easy to come by in Trinity sometimes >.<

stealinhorses · 17-12-2012 8:00pm

Why would Scully and Colavita specifically say that we need 65% in all subjects at the chemistry schols talk a couple of months ago?

Hollzy · 17-12-2012 8:19pm

I don't do chemistry - I wasn't at that so I don't know anything about it.

The talk I meant was just a general one where people who've gotten schols spoke about it. I thought they'd mentioned it but none of them do science and they pointed that out. I didn't know it had been said in a chemistry talk.

I guess Mr Snrub's comment about the SU not getting it right seems pretty accurate now. Damn.

ride-the-spiral · 17-12-2012 10:40pm

stealinhorses wrote: »

95% of the class can't do DC nodal/mesh analysis, which was covered by the end of the third lecture. Since then we've moved onto "solving" AC problems which consists of people asking each other what phasors are and what impedance means... for the past month or so.

Well, very glad I don't do it then! Patterson's course seems much better by comparison, although I seem to alone with that opinion...

I'd say that if the 65% thing was true then it should be online, but considering the amazing organisation I've heard about from the science course this year, it could be very well true, and they might not tell anyone.

Even though the school of physics didn't have a schols talk, Cross seemed to inform us of everything that I would've thought we needed, but he never mentioned it. Although maybe he didn't know, or it hadn't been decided yet.

Hollzy · 18-12-2012 2:16pm

None of my lecturers actually said it but there wasn't a biology or geology schols talk either. I did have a chat with a geology lecturer about schols (Patrick) and he was really helpful. I think he would've mentioned it... Unless he didn't know either but I was talking to him last week so he'd surely have known about it by then.

Is the science course office open this week? Would there be any point asking them?

Interferon Gamma · 18-12-2012 3:39pm

4th year Immunology/Biochem here.

When I was considering schols I remember reading something about 65% and compensation in Science, but not sure if I ever looked to see if it was enforced. (Ended up not doing the exams due to health problems) Something about 65% was always there anyway.

I'd advise forgetting about the 65% rule and just focus on doing your best. In non-maths Science subjects you need to be pretty consistant to get schols so it probably won't make too much of a difference to getting them.

stesh · 19-12-2012 2:57am

Not sure if it's been posted before, but the exact details of the requirements in each course for scholarship are set out in the Calendar here: http://www.tcd.ie/calendar/assets/pdf/foundation-scholarships.pdf

bscm · 19-12-2012 2:36pm

stesh wrote: »

Not sure if it's been posted before, but the exact details of the requirements in each course for scholarship are set out in the Calendar here: http://www.tcd.ie/calendar/assets/pdf/foundation-scholarships.pdf

Nothing about the supposed required marks though for Science, just that we're examined on material up to the end of the Michaelmas term and any other extra reading set by lecturers

Bit bad considering most other courses have detailed requirements clearly written there, and we're told "oh yeah, you'll be examined on everything up to Christmas"

Hollzy · 19-12-2012 5:34pm

Yeah, it's very vague.

I think I'm just going to presume the 65% thing is in effect. Realistically it'll make me work harder so maybe the lack of clarity is a blessing in disguise...