Talk:University of Toronto Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering

Untitled

I updated the figures in the introduction to the 2006 data provided by the outgoing Dean in his Five Year Report (dated June 26, 2006). I'll source the online version as soon as it's posted (currently only the Four Year Report dating to 2005 is available on the UofT Engineering website). --Nicklob 14:50, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

This article needs to be cleaned up and wikified. Cafe Nervosa 23:40, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

U of T doesn't have the largest Engineering Faulty in Canada, University of Waterloo does. Jeff 03:18, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

According to their somewhat outdated numbers (from 2003 or 2004), U of T has 219 faculty. According to the 2005 fall figures on their website, Waterloo has 218.5 faculty. U of T has about 1400 grad students to Waterloo's 1115. As for undergraduate enrolment, Waterloo's numbers are somewhat inflated by its mandatory co-op program, under which students take 5 years to graduate. Accounting for co-op students in both schools, the two faculties basically have identically sized undergraduate programs. In a nutshell, I don't see how Waterloo can be considered larger. FlocciNonFacio 04:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

However, Waterloo has recently undergone futher expansion to it's enginering faculty, with the recent addition of management studies and architecture to the faculty, and will be adding new faculty for their recent Mechatronics, Nanotechnology, and Management Engineering programs. I stil assert that Waterloo has the larger faculty. From Waterloo's Institutional Analysis & Planning site you can view enrolment numbers, which for the most recent start of the school year is 4842 Undergrad Engineering + 438 Undergrad Software Engineering + 1115 Grad Engineering. This is significantly more than the "close to 4,300 undergraduate students and approximately 1,400 graduate students" from U of T's website. I don't follow your logic about 5 years. They are students of the university for 5 years. Each year admitts it's number of students and each year a class graduates. No inflation. I am revising the article to say "one of the largest" which is a fair statement and truthful. Jeff 17:14, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

What I mean by "inflation" is that "4842 undergrads" does not accurately reflect the number of students in class at any given time. Waterloo engineers spend about 40% (2 years) of their time on co-op terms, away from the university. (As well, they pay 4 years' tuition (plus co-op fees) over 5 years.) On the other hand, most U of T engineers spend about 25% (3 summers = 1 year) away from school. That also explains why U of T has as many profs as Waterloo. As for your edit, I'm basically fine with it: I agree that it's a fair statement, and the actual facts are a bit too murky (because of U of T's lazy webmasters). FlocciNonFacio 03:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Well the debate then is if being on co-op (experiential learning) should be considered part of your time with the university. You are contributing to a degree requirment (the work term and work reports) and UW now requires all Engineering students to take an online course during their work terms. I don't see the argument for fees either...U of T pays $31,844 "Tuition Fees (including Incidental Fees)" while at Waterloo engineering you may have to pay substantially more (take Nanotech Eng @ $47287.44) (tuition and incidental), which results in actually a higher average tuition per year. In regards to the edit, 24.57.131.188 vandilized it with disregard to this discussion so I reverted back. I did however change the UW Eng page to reflect this discussion (Changed it as well to "one of"). Jeff 12:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

OH wow now you change it to "one of" for the UW engineering page. If it wasn't for me you would have left it there. You sir, are full of it and also spamming my talk page. I think you are the one thats reckless, I don't agree with your statements and you just revert them. You are the one who is power hungry. 24.57.131.188 14:38, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I changed it because of the reasonable and verbose response of FlocciNonFacio. That's what happens when you have a civilized discussion. You on the other hand chose to ignore the discussion on this talk page and revise it. That is reckless.

When a student is on co-op, their development comes from their interactions with their employer, not from the faculty of engineering. One can think of co-ops as being on some sort of exchange program with a business. My point about tuition fees has to do with what students pay for, not how much they pay. So inflated tuition fees for Nano (presumably to pay for the expansion costs) are irrelevant. Furthermore, co-op fees are for the services of the co-op system, not the faculty of engineering. The online course and the work term report together are probably equivalent to one normal course, so if you want to be more exact, you can probably consider co-ops to be part-timers with course loads of 20%. (At U of T, co-ops are classified as part-time students.) FlocciNonFacio 04:15, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps to have a more fair measure one could compare the size of the incoming/graduating classes? I know UofT keeps statistics on degrees issued, graduate or undergrad. In terms of the size of one school or another, I would argue that the number of alumni being generated each year would be the best measure, as that is a large part of what governs the "size" of a school's influence.

Where was the skulehouse?

Where was the original, "Little Red Skulehouse" located? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.100.53.238 (talk) 16:43, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Galbraith?

How is there no explicit mentioning of John Galbraith, the first principal of SPS? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.100.53.238 (talk) 16:45, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

File:UTIAS Ornithopter Flight.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:UTIAS Ornithopter Flight.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests October 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:27, 2 October 2011 (UTC)