Schools Getting into grad school with below 3.0 average?

[twofish-quant]

I didn't mean to pose a question. I think this system needs to change. I'm talking about Physics major having to do history, or a geology major having to do a CS class. If you let people do the subjects just relevant to the major, like for example I'm a CS major, if I had to do only CS core requirements, I'd finished school in about two and a half years maybe three.

And you'd end up with a seriously, seriously substandard education. History and philosophy becomes really important when are a CS major that wakes up one morning to find that there are no CS jobs, and then wonders to themselves, so what the hell do I do now? I woke up one morning and figured out that Plan A wasn't going to work, and knowing something about history and philosophy helped me to come up with plans B, C, D, E, etc. etc.

The other thing is that I do not see why getting out of school is such a priority. In this economy, you'll be spending the rest of your life in school. If you come out of school with a CS major, then 75% of what the teach you is going to be obsolete and useless within a decade.

I got into college at 17, I'm 21 now, so the way I see it I've wasted about a year of my life doing things I don't really like and that won't really help in my field.

College is supposed to be a time when you think, really really deeply about what you like.

Here is a question: How does studying about how Roman's shagged help me with JAVA or C++?

It won't. It will help you figure out what to do once you find out that the JAVA and C++ jobs are all getting outsourced to India and China. At that point, knowing something about Roman economic history might help you figure out how to deal with changing social systems. Also, if you decide that you want to organize people to do something about it, then having read Cicero let's you write more convincing editorials. Knowing about the concepts of gravitias, auctoritas, pietas let's you figure out how to behave. It also makes you feel much, much less lonely. If you read some of what people wrote in classical literature, you see lots of people trying to make sense of what is going on as the world around them is totally changing. It's really useful when you have to do the same thing.

People absorb the habits of people around them, and I think that undergraduates end up obsessed with career and trying to get things done quickly, because they are absorbing attitudes from the professors that are teaching them.

Once someone in computer industry told that if the transportation industry grew as fast as the computer industry then we would have flying cars. I think it was Bill Gates. Not sure though. Well, I think if colleges produced good programmers instead of what they produced now, the average lines of code per day won't be 20!

You aren't going to learn programming in a classroom. If you are lucky then you just enough so that you don't get totally smashed when you really do learn programming.

The difference between an A and an A-/B+ is the instructor that you take the class with.

You've just learned that grades are bogus. That's an important lesson.

His programming skills are pretty low. He gets help from his friends (including myself) to complete his projects. Now if I was at his school my GPA would have been more than what it is now. So I don't deserve to be in grad school because I was busy living life and he is in grad school why now?

Maybe you do deserve to be in grad school. It doesn't matter. One thing that you learn from Roman history is that people don't get what they deserve. I think that Cicero deserved to get his head put on a pike and a pin through his tongue or that Nero deserved to be emperor. No. A lot of surviving in society is to about playing political games (which you learn by reading Roman history) or to know when to play and when not to plpay (which you also learn by reading Roman history).

Also, why do you want to go to grad school anyway?

One of my seniors when I first entered college said that he sacrificed As to get laid. I did the same.

And if you read what happened when Romans did pretty much the same thing, that should be some sort of warning to you.

College can and should be made more efficient! Saves money and time.

Why should we care about efficiency? What's the point of saving money and time?

You've been brainwashed. I've been brainwashed. Everyone has been brainwashed. If you have a good undergraduate education then you should be able to figure out that people that brainwashed you want why, and you should be able to figure out what to do about it.

Do you know who Frederick Taylor and Frank Gilbereth are? I do (and I think they are idiots.)

 

[story645]

How does studying about how Roman's shagged help me with JAVA or C++?

Because the analytical skills and writing skills you used to write that paper on how Roman's shagged will be reused for that report you have to do for management, those papers you need to publish in grad school, your masters thesis, and your lovely dissertation. My mom's a programmer; she spends as much/more time writing reports and memos as she does coding. Being well rounded is also good for your social skills.

Well, I think if colleges produced good programmers instead of what they produced now, the average lines of code per day won't be 20!

LOC is a horrible metric of efficiency. Some languages encourage short programs, and a high LOC made up of pure copy & paste is far worse then the equivalent program made up of proper function calls.

His programming skills are pretty low. He gets help from his friends (including myself) to complete his projects.

I'm applying for a phD program in CS. None of the quals have anything to do with programming (except language paradigms), and the only reason programming even matters is 'cause it's needed for research. Do you have a really good relationship with a professor at your school who's willing to fund you and push the committee to accept you? Practically speaking, do you even have the interest in all the non-coding parts? I think a masters in software engineering is more your speed, (and some of those types of programs look at project portfolios and the like), but you may not have patience for all the non-coding aspects.

 

[Vectorspace]

... It will be a serious uphill battle to convince the committee that you are a good risk.

Why would accepting a student into grad school be a risk at all? Isn't university simply a business? Don't they want to get the money from that student?

Please explain the risk thing. I am very interested.

 

[story645]

Don't they want to get the money from that student?

In phD programs, the school generally funds (pays for) the student.

 

[Heresy]

Well, Thanks for the reply. I've to respectfully disagree.

I didn't mean to pose a question. I think this system needs to change. I'm talking about Physics major having to do history, or a geology major having to do a CS class. If you let people do the subjects just relevant to the major, like for example I'm a CS major, if I had to do only CS core requirements, I'd finished school in about two and a half years maybe three. I got into college at 17, I'm 21 now, so the way I see it I've wasted about a year of my life doing things I don't really like and that won't really help in my field. Here is a question: How does studying about how Roman's shagged help me with JAVA or C++?

Once someone in computer industry told that if the transportation industry grew as fast as the computer industry then we would have flying cars. I think it was Bill Gates. Not sure though. Well, I think if colleges produced good programmers instead of what they produced now, the average lines of code per day won't be 20!

My overall average is a B-, maybe a little less. One thing that I've realized especially
in big schools, where sometimes there are multiple sections/class, the grade you obtain depends a lot on the instructor. Last semester I took differential equations and except for my finals I did quite well. My grade was a C+. My friend in another section took the class with another instructor and he got a B. We did the same textbook. They covered less chapters than us and 10% of the grade was homework that you just had to turn in. 5% was attendance. Any retard could have got 15% of the grade.

The difference between an A and an A-/B+ is the instructor that you take the class
with.

This other guy that I know did computer science in another school (not a
community college) and his GPA was greater than mine thus got into UB grad school. His programming skills are pretty low. He gets help from his friends (including myself) to complete his projects. Now if I was at his school my GPA would have been more than what it is now. So I don't deserve to be in grad school because I was busy living life and he is in grad school why now?

One of my seniors when I first entered college said that he sacrificed As to get laid. I did the same.

My friend btw got a job for 80k starting pay.

I wasn't looking for advice. I was surfing the net and came across this thread and just thought of expressing my thoughts. Thanks for your reply!

College can and should be made more efficient! Saves money and time.

QQ
You aren't the only person who has to take a few courses that he/she has no interest in.
You made your choices, other people made theirs.
And yeah... the reason for your marks is totally the instructor's fault. [/sarcasm]

No one is entitled to anything. You "sacrificed As to get laid" and didn't study as hard as he could've for school, so now you pay the price. You don't deserve to be in grad school because you haven't shown any indication of being able to succeed in grad school. Though I'm sure you could try telling the adcoms that you were busy getting laid, that might get you some points.

P.S. Plenty of people score As and get laid regularly at the same time lol - why sacrifice?

 

[Choppy]

Why would accepting a student into grad school be a risk at all? Isn't university simply a business? Don't they want to get the money from that student?

Please explain the risk thing. I am very interested.

At the undergraduate level, bringing in more students can generate more revenue. However, you have to keep in mind that tuition only covers a part of the cost of educating students and a larger portion of the funding depends on government.* So it isn't a "simple" business and follows a more beureaucratic model.

At the graduate level things are different as well. As has been mentioned, the university will often fund graduate students - covering tuition and providing a modest living stipend. But what's more important to the people on admission committees is that the students they admit are productive and successful. They want graduate students who are going to produce papers and advance their projects rather that those who will become time and resource sinks.

*Note, my experience here is largely based on the Canadian system. In the US, I believe the ratio of government funding is somewhat different, but it's still there.