what is the difference between B.Sc. And B.S. hons? and which one is better?
This depends on the school. In some placed there is no difference.
Traditionally, honours degrees are geared more towards preparing one for graduate study, while non-honours degrees allow for more electives.
but is there a difference in the syllabus and course of B.Sc. and B.S. honours?
and if u want to be a scientist, which one is a better choice? B.Sc. or B.S. honours?
In Australia, B.Sc Hons involves doing an extra year.
Depending on the university, this year can be extremely gruelling.
The courses are alot harder than the previous year and you have to write an
honours thesis, which can involve some independent research.
You don't need to really commit to doing it at the start of your degree.
If you enrol in BSc Hons at the start, you can still graduate at the end of your third year with a BSc. But you should definitely do honours if you want to go into research.
can You do M.S. honours after doing non-honours B.Sc.?
How should I proceed, if my school makes no difference between hons. and non-hons. BSc (3 years study) and I wish to enrol in graduate study at a school which requieres BSc hons.?
I guess you should ask the school you are applying to.
At the school I did my PhD at (in Australia) you could do a "Graduate diploma of Science" which was basically the honours year, but outside a degree so I think you had to pay more. Actually I graduated with a BSc and then went back a year later to a different university and did just straight honours there. I think they just counted me as a transfer student. As a result I have two degree certificates now - one BSc and one BSc (Hons).
You can also do a Masters degree as well. The disadvantage for most people is that these usually cost more than doing honours (when you can't get a scholarship and the scholarships require honours).
To know the difference in syllabus, the best thing to do is go check it out. Most schools have their calendars online these days. If you're ultimate goal is to get in to graduate school and go on in academia, then the honours degree is usually the way to go.
If I understand your question, you're saying that your school offers a 3 year B.Sc. and (presumably) a 4 year honours B.Sc. If your goal is graduate school, you're generally better off taking the honours program.
What awful advice unless you know which courses are required for the honours degree and even if you do it is still not great advice. For graduate school your going to be judged on your performance in relevant courses, GRE, and research experience not some title with unknown requirements. I doubt most schools take the time or care enough to take the time to figure out what constitutes an honours degree at school X. The best thing for him is to figure which relevant courses he has the likelihood of succeeding in based on his experiences and takes those courses and excel then use his extra time on obtaining relevant research or professional experience, not conforming to the requirements for an extra word on his degree.
I don't understand your comment, J93. The original poster wanted to know the difference in syllabus between an honours and a non-honours degree. My advice was to look up the courses listed for each in the course calendar of whatever program he or she is interested in. This is outlined in every calendar I've ever seen.
In the school where I did my undergraduate degree there was a big difference between an honours degree and non-honours degree, and the bottom line was that a non-honours degree would not qualify the student for graduate school - regardless of how well he or she performed because there wasn't enough material covered. Naturally this varies from school to school. So the best advice is for the student to look at each program and decide (1) whether or not the program will qualify him or her for graduate school, and (2) which will give him or her the best tools to succeed. Even if a non-honours program qualifies the student, traditionally, honours programs tend to more rigorous in my experience, and thus better prepare the student for graduate school.
There is no reason why he cant go for a non honors degree and pick courses that he feels are relevant for graduate school and take those courses to supplement his non-honors degree and prepare him for graduate school. These courses should be chosen so that he has the highest likelihood of getting a good grade while being relevant to his graduate school hopes. This is better than obtaining an honors degree just to have the word "honors" on his degree that doesnt cater to his needs. There is a huge difference between what would be the best preparation for gradaute school and what one should do to get into graduate school.
I think a student who has taken every single math, physics course with some CS/Elec.Eng courses is prepared best for physics graduate school. However such a student with either a less than stellar GPA due to time constraints or take 7 years to graduate. He would probably get rejected from all the top graduate schools.
On the other hand, if a student takes only his required classes and supplements with only the most relevant courses for graduate school and consequently does well due to the lack of time constraints, uses his extra time for research and studying for standardized exams,and then applies to graduate school he is bound to get into some pretty good schools if not the top schools.
You are pushing him more towards the former case than the latter.
My point is that all that research experience and/or extra time for entrance exams won't mean squat if the program doesn't qualify him or her for entrance into a graduate program.
I think perhaps we'll have to disagree on the other point though. In my opinion, stacking your courses to get good marks rather that a broad education only hurts you in the long run.
This is just not a realistic situation
Qualifying isnt that hard usually about 8 classes for math
and for physics the requirements in terms of course selection are less stringent otherwise
there wouldnt be so many indian/chinese Elec/Mech Engineers with a handful of physics courses but really high PGRE and kind of related research experience getting into pretty good physics grad programs.
I checked UC Schools Yale,Harvard,UIUC, Princeton,MIT and none of them specified rigid course requirements like in math.
I personally dont agree with the lack of a rigid requirement of a physics BS for applying/(being accepted) to graduate school but the reality is that it is not and a whole lot of foreign students with high PGRE prove this every year.
i simply haVe 3 questions.1.whaT is the difference between B.Sc. and B.Sc. hons?2.for a personn who wants to be a researcher and scientisT,which one of them is a better choice?3.can u do M.S. hons.after doing non-honours B.Sc.?
Asked and answered.
and what gives u more knowledge about physics,doing honours or non-honours B.Sc.?
Separate names with a comma.