“Canadian universities only care about grades. Extracurriculars do not matter.”
“Good grades are not enough anymore. Students need a packed activity list.”
Parents hear both versions all the time. They sound completely incompatible, but each can be true for a particular program.
The problem is the phrase “Canadian universities.” It lumps hundreds of admissions processes into one imaginary rulebook.
The university, campus, and program all matter. At the same institution, one program may admit mainly on academic results while another asks for written responses, a video, an interview, or a portfolio.
So the useful question is not, “Do Canadian universities care about extracurriculars?”
It is, “What will this specific program actually see?”
Grades usually open the door, but some programs want more
Grades still carry a great deal of weight. They show whether a student has completed the prerequisites and whether their academic record is competitive. An impressive activity cannot replace a missing required course. It is also unlikely to rescue an average that sits far outside a program’s usual range.
But “grades matter” and “grades are the only thing that matters” are different claims.
The University of Toronto says most of its programs require academic results only. A smaller group asks for a supplemental application to learn more about a student’s interests and experiences. Rotman Commerce is one of them.
Rotman explains that its supplement includes brief written and video responses. Those responses are considered alongside the student’s academic record.
For a student applying to Rotman Commerce, “Is my average high enough?” is only one part of the preparation. They also need something real to say when the camera turns on.
Can they explain a choice they made without sounding rehearsed? Can they describe what they did, what changed, and what they learned?
Those answers are hard to manufacture at the last minute.
UBC Sauder does not admit a transcript in isolation
UBC reviews grades, course choices, and the Personal Profile. It pays particular attention to courses connected to the degree and uses the Personal Profile to learn about a student’s experiences, responsibilities, leadership, and reflection.
Students applying to the UBC Sauder Bachelor of Commerce also answer commerce-specific questions. They may be asked how they handled a problem or an unfamiliar situation and how they have had a positive effect on their community. The current application requirements also include a video interview within the Personal Profile.
None of this means a teenager needs to launch a flashy nonprofit or collect national awards.
UBC says it is not looking for one preferred type of activity or a long list of achievements. Caring for a sibling, working a part-time job, playing a sport, making art, helping in the community, or carrying an ordinary responsibility over time can all give a student something meaningful to discuss.
The name of the activity matters less than what the student actually did. Did they take responsibility? Did something go wrong? Did they listen, adjust, and improve?
That is where a generic activity line becomes a genuine story.
Even business programs do not share one admissions formula
Ivey’s Advanced Entry Opportunity offers another useful comparison.
Ivey currently states that its AEO assessment gives equal weight to academic performance and leadership experience. Each accounts for 50 per cent of the evaluation.
Put these three popular business paths side by side:
- UBC Sauder reviews academics and the Personal Profile, including commerce-specific responses and a video interview.
- Rotman Commerce considers the academic record together with brief written and video responses.
- Ivey AEO gives equal weight to academics and leadership experience.
All three care about grades. They simply do not use the same process to understand the student behind them.
That is why searching for “UBC admissions” or “U of T admissions” is too broad. Families need to find the current official page for UBC Sauder BCom, Rotman Commerce, Ivey AEO, or whichever program the student is actually considering.
More activities do not automatically make a stronger application
Once parents discover that a program reads extracurricular information, the obvious reaction is to add more.
Soon the calendar is full, the family is exhausted, and the student still cannot explain why any of it mattered.
Five activities touched briefly may reveal less than one commitment in which a student had real responsibility. An ordinary experience can be rich if the student had to make choices, solve a problem, accept feedback, or live with the result.
Three questions are more helpful than counting activity titles.
What did your child own?
“Participated in” tells us almost nothing. Researching, budgeting, recruiting, communicating, designing, analysing, or delivering something gives the student a real job to do.
What happened when the plan stopped working?
A smooth success story is often a short one. A shortage of information, a disagreement on the team, or a weak first result gives the student a chance to make a judgment and change course.
Can they explain it in their own words?
If the experience disappears as soon as the polished essay is taken away, it will struggle to hold up in a video response, an interview, or a thoughtful follow-up question.
What if the university never sees it?
At this point, it is tempting to make a very practical calculation:
“If the program does not consider activities, why should my child spend time on them?”
I understand why parents ask. I do not agree with the conclusion.
Admissions is only one small part of what a good experience can give a teenager.
The first change often happens long before the application. A student who has always said they love business may research a real company and discover that they enjoy the analysis but hate pitching an idea. Another may finish a finance project and realize that writing, design, or technology holds their attention much longer.
Sometimes an experience gives a young person a direction. Sometimes it helps them rule one out. Both are useful, and learning early that a path does not fit can save years of following somebody else’s idea of success.
I also understand the worry behind the question. High school is busy. A teenager has limited time, and families want that time to count.
But when every decision begins with “Will this help with university?”, a teenager can start using the application itself to decide what deserves their interest and effort.
Admissions rules will keep changing. Popular programs will change too. AI will make polished answers easier to produce. Today’s ideal activity list may look dated by the time a younger sibling applies.
What a young person has genuinely tried, how they respond when the work gets difficult, and whether they can use feedback to improve will still matter after the admissions cycle is over.
Families should read the rules carefully. The rules affect outcomes, and clear preparation prevents avoidable mistakes.
Your child also needs room to follow a question they truly want to understand, take responsibility for something real, and finish the experience knowing themselves a little better.
Some of those stories will belong in an application. Others will not.
The ones that stay off the application still stay with the child.