patrick.net

What I mean by kissing ass is that you confuse the randomness of admissions, since so many ppl apply for the freshman class, with the actual rigor of the program, which is farcical.

And the reason why it's farcical is that given the propensity of legacy and fortunate son admissions, in addition to the Asian figure skating valedictorians, the school can't adopt a sink or swim mentality in terms of coursework.

On the whole, Harvard has to make certain that enough ppl can score a B-, w/o going crazy. And thus, when an ordinary Bostonian, meaning one with a B to A average in Extension classes takes classes during the day, he doesn't find the program all that overwhelming. A lot of that has to do with the fact that the "Al Gore" who sits next to him, is ready to take the C+. And then, if this ordinary Bostonian is extra diligent, even he can compete against the Asian figure skating valedictorian for an A, because that's scoring an ~88 average, not a ~95 one. That's also an effect of generalized grade inflation where HU leans more towards A-'s and A's than B+'s. Therefore, the average Bostonian can get his 89 and the valedictorian Asian, a 96, and both of them can be honors graduates.

When I say average Bostonian, I mean one who does his work, not some lazy schmuck. And yes, this also means that this person has got some modicum of intelligence.

Rin says

as in Newton/Goethe, then no one from the greater Boston area, could take classes as a special student during the day, and get B's and A's.

Here you really make me wonder. DO you have any idea how stupid this sounds ? If Newton was a student today, he would still have to take some BS survey level classes, and he wouldn't be putting much effort or attention to them. Where as some local taking the class for night school would be seeing it as a serious challenge. Even for more challenging classes, do you really think they get curved that much to the higher performance level of the students ? The content of the class is what it is. It's not like the professors are going to intentionally ask tricky questions because the straightforward facts that are the content of the curriculum are too easy, and they need to have some C and and D grades.

They'll get those C and D grades anyway, from people that are too lazy or are partying too much or too much in love or countless other reasons why they might not attend to the work and the reading properly. Maybe Newton gets distracted with some modern version of alchemy and he's the one getting a D in that boring class.

This is a really stupid thread, I have to get back to my tedious and boring work, grading tests. Great way to spend my Veteran's Day off. Bascially grading stuff all day (when I'm not participating in this nonsense).

marcus says

those C and D grades

It's obvious that you don't know Harvard, almost no one gets Cs and Ds there.

marcus says

It's not like the professors are going to intentionally ask tricky questions because the straightforward facts that are the content of the curriculum

Actually, in a lot of places, professors not only ask tricky questions but also test the depth of student's knowledge outside of the basic class notes. This is why there are so many state univ engineering courses where ppl get Cs in subjects like Thermodynamics.

Rin says

almost no one gets Cs and Ds ther

YEah, I know, it's like graduate school. A C is kind of like failing.

marcus says

YEah, I know, it's like graduate school. A C is kind of like failing.

At a place a like Harvard, that thermodynamics would be structured in such a way that getting from an A- to an A, is the tricky, most difficult problem on the exam. And thus, it gives some distinction to the flat A student over the lesser ones.

On the whole, many ppl will get from a B- to an A-. Those who get below a B-, generally didn't learn the material well at all.

Rin says

On the whole, many ppl will get from a B- to an A-. Those who get below a B-, generally didn't learn the material well at all.

In other words, there's nothing so special about places like Harvard.

Rin says

In other words, there's nothing so special about places like Harvard.

Except the quality of the students.

marcus says

Rin says

In other words, there's nothing so special about places like Harvard.

Except the quality of the students.

I'd prefer that half the school be filled with local *special students* from the Boston area (meaning ones who'll do ALL the work), along with the Asian valedictorians, and make sure that all the legacies and Gores, get their C-'s. And then, Harvard would be a great school.

Aside from that scenario, it's still a finishing house for recruitment onto management consulting or financial services firms because in time, even the former valedictorians start to become idle and self-indulgent. I'd seen this with former New England attendants, who'd lost their academic mojo during their time at Harvard College. Being surrounded by kids with privileged backgrounds does that to an ordinary person.

Rin says

local *special students* from the Boston area (meaning ones who'll do ALL the work)

I say local because this cohort effect would only happen, if these kids were co-located. Only the presence of hard working ppl, can inspire others to follow suit. A bunch of distance learners won't have the same effect. Thus, it's limited to those in commuting distance of the greater Boston area.

Rin says

In a nutshell ... Al Gore, George W Bush, and John Kerry were all mediocre students.

Gore and Kerry were mediocre. Bush was an imbecile by any standards. But point taken.

Here's a concrete scenario as to why Harvard College, the undergraduate school, is overrated ... this is in contrast to let's say the distance program at the Univ of London, with London School of Economics as the lead college.

If one's let's say a Bostonian and takes classes at night at the Extension program, sure, the program is less rigorous than the day time sections, however, to complete certain programs, taking classes during the day is necessary, as not all comparable courses are available at night. So if a person wants some Math/Econ concentration, he'd have to take Econometrics during the day with the day time Harvard College bunch. For that, he'd be spending a slew of cash and thus, won't be able to afford too many stints like that. In that situation, he'd taken Econometrics and with probably an ordinary amount of effort (doing one's work on time), get a B+ or even an A-. And with just a little bit of an extra push, he could get an A, and an A in a school full of former valedictorians (sans Gore).

At the Univ of London, however, it won't be the same. You see, in the distance program, the exams are constructed the same, on or offsite. And thus, many students at LSE on-campus fear math heavy courses, esp Econometrics, because the coursework is 100%, covering all aspects of the material. There are almost no shortcuts and thus, to get a first class honours, an A grade, one needs a 70+% on a fully comprehensive year long exam. For the most part, a lot of ppl at UoL (distance or on-campus) take a B or even a C in that class, simply because the work to accomplish that A is overwhelming, since they need to study the full year to cover that many chapters and exercises in full detail. In fact, the stupid rich kids who study there, are happy with a passing mark, since for them, their future banking job is guaranteed by their parents and that the only purpose for college is to party in the West End.

marcus says

Dan8267 says

I feel sorry for the people who have Marcus as a teacher

Very compelling argument and on topic. I take it as proof that you're dishonest and devoid of any integrity whatsoever.

And that is exactly why you make a shitty teacher. Is that what you consider delving into a subject? Someone makes a criticism of you and instead of dealing with the criticism either by refuting it or, better yet, addressing its merits and changing, you simply attack the criticizer. No good student, teacher, or person would do that.

Even in my brief criticism, I gave you are very specific reason why you aren't a good teacher. A good teacher encourages students to question everything. Clearly, you do not. In fact, you cannot even handle having your abilities questioned. As such, you prove my point time and time again. And you expect us to think that you are challenging students to think critically? How laughable.

Anything worth believing in can stand up to questioning. And that includes any particular person's skills.

It's nice to see the libbies at each others throats as they come to the realization that their time in power is bottoming out like the luminosity of a new moon...

Dan8267 says

marcus says

Dan8267 says

I feel sorry for the people who have Marcus as a teacher

Very compelling argument and on topic. I take it as proof that you're dishonest and devoid of any integrity whatsoever.

marcus says

Apparently in Dan's world, it makes me a bad teacher that I did not advise students that EARNED full ride scholarships to Harvard that they should look up this guy Dan, who could give them excellent advice on what to do with their lives, and that he would guide them to a better path that included skipping college and learning a trade or profession online.

A good teacher would not have to resort to such a petulant straw man argument. Nor would anyone living up to even the lowest academic standards have to resort to ad hominem attacks rather than addressing the topic at hand, which is whether or not Ivy league degrees mean crap.

But to your point, of course I could teach any computer science major far more than any college could. The thing is, I wouldn't waste my time doing that. I'm far more productive, and earn far more, doing real work in the real world than teaching my replacements. Any software developer is going to have far more valuable knowledge and experience than a college professor. Hell, that should be true for just about every field, but especially so in computer science. It is ridiculous to even suggest that people living in academia are even remotely away of what real-world software development is like. The real industry is far more sophisticated and complex and beautiful than academia can ever imagine.

Ironman says

and

Kids, remember to stay of the drugs or you'll end up servicing goats and glory holes in New Jersey just like CIC.

Dan8267 says

I wouldn't waste my time doing that. I'm far more productive, and earn far more, doing real work in the real world than teaching my replacements

Ouch!

SoftShell says

It's nice to see the libbies at each others throats

You're an idiot if you think Marcus is a liberal.

Dan8267 says

Gore and Kerry were mediocre. Bush was an imbecile by any standards. But point taken.

Bush had been skewered for ages.

In mean time, Gore and Kerry had gotten off scot free, that's why I'm picking on them as well.

Rin says

Dan8267 says

I wouldn't waste my time doing that. I'm far more productive, and earn far more, doing real work in the real world than teaching my replacements

Ouch!

I wasn't actually trying to be snarky there. I was just being honest. It would be a huge pay cut for me to switch to teaching. It would be ridiculous. And I'd have to put up with some college's administrative department. I'd rather make far more money doing far more interesting things and not having to put up with much bullshit. Of course corporate America does have it's share of bullshit, but my current gig is a really nice one with no office politics, a good work environment, intelligent coworkers, a short commute, and interesting work.

The fact is that being a teacher is a low-pay profession and that's why teachers are usually -- and I mean this as an observation not a judgement -- people who can't crack it in the real world. Those who can't do teach.

I'm not saying all teachers are bad, but if you are really good at something, you're probably doing that something not teaching it. The few exceptions to this rule are research professors who teach AND do primary research, and they usually aren't good teachers. Think professors that publish peer-review papers in sciences and other fields.

Rin says

In mean time, Gore and Kerry had gotten off scot free, that's why I'm picking on them as well.

Fair enough.

Classic Dan. His first response to anything I said in this thread.

Dan8267 says

I feel sorry for the people who have Marcus as a teacher. A good teacher encourages students to question everything.

Later he says this.

Dan8267 says

Nor would anyone living up to even the lowest academic standards have to resort to ad hominem attacks rather than addressing the topic at hand

This next part is priceless.

Dan8267 says

marcus says

Dan8267 says

I feel sorry for the people who have Marcus as a teacher

Very compelling argument and on topic. I take it as proof that you're dishonest and devoid of any integrity whatsoever.

And that is exactly why you make a shitty teacher. Is that what you consider delving into a subject? Someone makes a criticism of you and instead of dealing with the criticism either by refuting it or, better yet, addressing its merits and changing, you simply attack the criticizer. No good student, teacher, or person would do that.

Even in my brief criticism, I gave you are very specific reason why you aren't a good teacher. A good teacher encourages students to question everything. Clearly, you do not. In fact, you cannot even handle having your abilities questioned. As such, you prove my point time and time again. And you expect us to think that you are challenging students to think critically? How laughable.

"Is that what you consider delving into a subject? Someone makes a criticism of you"

Delving into what subject ? Whether you have a legitimate reason to feel sorry for my students ? You call saying what CIC has said to me dozens of times, that he feels sorry for my students, because I'm arguing with him, some kind of legitimate criticism ? If you think you have any idea what it's like to be a student of mine, you know you're lying. Why should I argue something that I know with certainty you know is a lie ?

"A good teacher encourages students to question everything."

With respect to Mathematics, I'll encourage students to question why, or to question whether there aren't better or more interesting ways to look at a problem. But when it comes to their decisions regarding what colleges to apply to, or whether college is right for them, I tread pretty lightly, because I don't think there are easy answers to that, and I don't even want to have too much influence on such important decisions.

Where exactly in this thread did I lead you to conclude that relative to being a HS Mathematics teacher, I have erred on the side of not encouraging students to question things ?

Dan8267 says

I'm not saying all teachers are bad, but if you are really good at something, you're probably doing that something not teaching it.

How does that even apply to teaching teens at the high school level ? At that level, hopefully what the person is really good at is teaching, and working with kids.

In summary, Marcus's idea is that Harvard is a great/non-overrated school based upon the propensity of Asian (or white) valedictorians with skating and violin trophies.

I counter that notion with the idea that since so many legacies and fortunate sons have a base camp there, it leads the school towards a finishing house model where sure, there are some great students but at the same time, a certain amount of an ass kissing population cohort cul-de-sac, weaseling their way into internships at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs. This added cultural feature, however, deludes the place and makes it prone to grade inflation with a general level of ordinariness, making it an overrated school.

In contrast, the Univ of London, given the fact that so many residents of the former (or current) British Commonwealth nations take its exam, has got to maintain some international standard where an 'A' is an 'A', and thus, the competitive exams like LSE in economics/math, etc, force the idle rich to at least study for a 'pass' with the idea that their GPA doesn't really matter in the end.

Rin says

Asian (or white) valedictorians with skating and violin trophies.

Shows what you know about Harvard. Only one of the 5 students I mentioned are white or asian, but they were all either valedictorians, or number 2.

I'll quote myself.

“This year’s applicant pool was remarkable by any standard in its academic and extracurricular excellence,” said Fitzsimmons. More than 14,000 scored 700 or above on the SAT critical reading test; 17,000 scored 700 or above on the SAT math test; 15,000 scored 700 or higher on the SAT writing test; and 3,800 were ranked first in their high school classes.

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/03/2032-admitted-to-class-of-16/

marcus says

Rin says

Asian (or white) valedictorians with skating and violin trophies.

Shows what you know about Harvard.

“This year’s applicant pool was remarkable by any standard in its academic and extracurricular excellence,” said Fitzsimmons. More than 14,000 scored 700 or above on the SAT critical reading test; 17,000 scored 700 or above on the SAT math test; 15,000 scored 700 or higher on the SAT writing test; and 3,800 were ranked first in their high school classes.

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2012/03/2032-admitted-to-class-of-16/

Marcus, haven't I already acknowledged the admissions gate?

How come you haven't come up with anything, regarding the actual difficulty of the program?

I think Dan is right, you are a moron.

Rin says

I counter that notion with the idea that since so many legacies and fortunate sons have a base camp there, it leads the school towards a finishing house model where sure, there are some great students but at the same time, a certain amount of an ass kissing population cohort cul-de-sac, weaseling their way into internships at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs. This added cultural feature, however, deludes the place and makes it prone to grade inflation with a general level of ordinariness, making it an overrated school.

In contrast, the Univ of London, given the fact that so many residents of the former (or current) British Commonwealth nations take its exam, has got to maintain some international standard where an 'A' is an 'A', and thus, the competitive exams like LSE in economics/math, etc, force the idle rich to at least study for a 'pass' with the idea that their GPA doesn't really matter in the end.

Marcus, please read the above and tell me that it isn't true.

Rin says

How come you haven't come up with anything, regarding the actual difficulty of the program?

I never argued with that.

marcus says

you are right that if one applies themself, and has decent abilities they can learn just as much or more at U of I Urbana, of many of California's UC schools as well as countless other Universities and Colleges.

I've made the point that the quality of the students means something. Grades mean less than you think, but I understand in your world income, grades, and any other metrics you can use to compare yourself to others is what it's all about. You've made that clear repeatedly. It's what's underlying this thread too.

What you're saying is hey, I'm just as good, in fact better than those people that go to or went to Harvard.

I get it. You're amazing ! You're better than everyone okay ?

Rin says

I think Dan is right, you are a moron.

Good one.

In a nutshell ... Harvard College is difficult to gain admissions into, if you're not Al Gore III.

And that's all that I'll give to Marcus.

marcus says

Grades mean less than you think, but I understand in your world income, grades, and any other metrics you can use to compare yourself to others is what it's all about. You've made that clear repeatedly. It's what's underlying this thread too.

What you're saying is hey, I'm just as good, in fact better than those people that go to or went to Harvard.

I get it. You're amazing ! You're better than everyone okay ?

Actually, these things do mean something because in contrast to the Navy SEALs, a person like myself has zero (read: zero) chance of passing BUD/S, yet, I could get a 3.8 at Harvard College, just by doing my work on time and not slacking off.

And thus today, I know zero actual SEALs (not a friend of a friend) but I know plenty of grads from Harvard and other Ivy colleges who're not all that impressive in the real world.

Rin says

I know plenty of grads from Harvard and other Ivy colleges who're not all that impressive in the real world.

I know, right ? It's like I said, you're better than them.

marcus says

I know, right ? It's like I said, you're better than them.

Sorry, but Ivy colleges, esp Harvard, tout their product to us corporations. And that message is this ... 'because of our admissions selection process minus Al Gore, our graduates are the best of breed.'

Now, the rest of the world is suppose to buy that tale, hook, line, and sinker. Sorry, but nothing could be further from the truth. I'd worked with grads from countless universities and the best (in terms of real work, not sales pitches) are still state unis (like Michigan, Illinois, GaTech, etc) with great science/engineering programs because for the most part, those students needed to earn their accolades, plus gain recognition from recruiters, as it wasn't bestowed upon them by well connected alumni. But yes, even those persons needed to later conform, by getting some MBA from MIT-Sloan, Wharton, Columbia, or Harvard. At least when that part had happened, they knew that their finishing school wasn't an academic place but a networking one.

Rin says

Sorry, but nothing could be further from the truth.

I don't know about that. Many of these students managed to finish at the top of their high school class, with high SAT scores. Then they still continued to grow for years after that.

It's safe to assume these are people of relatively high bandwidth, discipline and work ethic. I would agree that better people people can be found, that bloomed a little later, or were more driven later, or who didn't burn out from HS, but those people are harder to find and riskier to hire in to those 6 figure right out of school investment banking jobs.

From Goldman's point of view, its lower risk to invest huge amounts of training and time in to harvard grads, than it is to risk it with others who might be better but are also more likely to be worse. It's an expected value assessment. These are people who have proven their ability to perform for that prize. And they did it when they were younger and they still had plenty more growing to do - even just the physiological part. So some of them will be super stars. (even if you have known some duds).

marcus says

Rin says

I know plenty of grads from Harvard and other Ivy colleges who're not all that impressive in the real world.

I know, right ? It's like I said, you're better than them.

I know I'm better than 99% of them. My work says it all. Why should anyone have to engage in false humility. The only true measurement of a person's talent is the work he or she produces. Degrees and prestige mean nothing. This is why science is the great equalizer. Contributions to science are independent of race, religion, gender, nationality, class, wealth, degree, or credentials. It's the actual work that matters, and that's the way it should be.

Show me your work and I can judge you. Show me a degree and I know nothing about you.

Ironman says

Sure thing, because coding is so difficult, a monkey can do it.

Only a talentless monkey like you would say that. With every move your mouth betrays your ignorance as well as your love of goat penis.

marcus says

From Goldman's point of view, its lower risk to invest huge amounts of training and time in to harvard grads, than it is to risk it with others who might be better but are also more likely to be worse. It's an expected value assessment. These are people who have proven their ability to perform for that prize. And they did it when they were younger and they still had plenty more growing to do - even just the physiological part. So some of them will be super stars. (even if you have known some duds).

Actually, it's better if Goldman hired straight from Univ of Illinois/Urbana-Champaign and simply asked for the students who did the best there (who don't want to attend a future program in science or medicine). Chances are, they'd find a better worker, as those folks needed to earn their accolades during college, not before it. Remember, Harvard undergrad is a high grade inflation place where there's a lot of intrinsic laziness.

Dan8267 says

I know I'm better than 99% of them. My work says it all. Why should anyone have to engage in false humility. The only true measurement of a person's talent is the work he or she produces. Degrees and prestige mean nothing.

Unfortunately, given the fact that I work in finance, the only merit is a trader's P/L. Everything else is a mirage of sorts. This is why I'm not so keen on propping up Harvard College, since unlike the Navy SEALs, they haven't proven anything to me, besides graduating with a high high school GPA and SAT combination with some silly extracurriculars.

I prefer to see what a person can do, after he becomes an actual adult.

Let's face it Marcus, you just can't accept the notion that Harvard is not that difficult of an academic place vs let's say the Univ of Illinois/UC-Science/Engineering, where ppl are competing all of the time for their grades.

You're so enamored with your HS valedictorians that you can't figure out that they are just kids. If they don't compete like adults, then that's what they'll be, children.

In my Navy SEALS analogy, everyone enters as an enlisted but if one survives, one becomes special forces. You see, Harvard College has no such process. Sure, the ones with good grades apply for medical or law school ... big deal. And then, lots of everyone else, put in their resume for those recruiting cycles at management consulting and financial firms. Again ... big deal.

That process, in the real world, is known as a finishing house. When ppl are basically groomed for a particular line of thinking/work/etc, w/o really being challenged, it's pathetic. Even at my company, we need to see someone having worked somewhere, before taking a serious look. Granted, our work is lame and sure, if possible, we take the Ivy grad w/ at least one correct *financial services* job, but again, it's because of stupid ppl like you, who're big into name dropping than real achievement.

Oh, I forgot, high school valedictorian.

Ivy Leagues aren't meritocracies. They have way too many Al Gore/W alumni students for that, and deliberately look at the "Whole Person".

What bullshit.

Does the NFL give two shits if a star college quarterback or the #1 Kicker in all of Missouri they want was on the Chess Team or volunteered at the Commodore Yacht Club's 50th Sailing Against Polio Event?

No. So why the $*#@! should Academic Institutions give two shits other than "Kicked ass on SAT", America Chemistry Contest HS Project Finalist, etc.

thunderlips11 says

Ivy Leagues aren't meritocracies. They have way too many Al Gore/W alumni students for that, and deliberately look at the "Whole Person".

What bullshit.

Does the NFL give two shits if a star college quarterback they want was on the Chess Team or volunteered at the Commodore Yacht Club's 50th Sailing Against Polio Event?

No. So why the $*#@! should Academic Institutions give two shits other than "Kicked ass on SAT", America Chemistry Contest HS Project Finalist, etc.

Talk of Marcus, apparently, he's convinced that its entrants are the best of the best high schoolers.

DieBankOfAmericaPhukkingDie says

But only W ended up in the Oval Office being fucked in the ass by Victor Ashe screaming, "MMMMOOOOOOOOMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!"

Somehow you come with some little known facts about W and the Donald, where do you get this from?