Slashdot Mirror
MIT's SAT Math Error
theodp writes "The Wall Street Journal reports that for years now, MIT wasn't properly calculating the average freshmen SAT scores (reg.) used to determine U.S. News & World Report's influential annual rankings. In response to an inquiry made by The Tech regarding the school's recent drop in the rankings, MIT revealed that in past years it had excluded the test scores of foreign students as well as those who fared better on the ACT than the SAT, both violations of the U.S. News rules. MIT's reported first-quartile SAT verbal and math scores for the 2006 incoming class totaled 1380, a drop of 50 points from 2005."
" I saw far too many kids there for the party myself "
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m4422/is_n6_v15/ai_20860361
"Her dad once chastised her for wasting his tuition money by not going to her classes. With typical Esther aplomb, she countered, "Daddy, you don't understand. You don't come to Harvard to study. You come to Harvard to get to know the right people."
Need Mercedes parts ?
That is silly; I can find mainstream pundits that agree with pretty much any side of a debate. I agree with the OP moderation: first, this whole thread has little to do with the article (calculation of school ranking error) or even marginally relevant (are school rankings relevant). Instead, the first post takes the deliberately polarizing and wide-encompassing claim "college is not worth it" in a single line, obviously with the intent to garner a lot of replies.
Did the OP add anything to a conversation? Is a unilateral claim such as this insightful? Informative? Ask yourself this seriously. It is off topic, and just a way to get the predictable responses (I did well in school and have a sucky job... I didn't go to college and make millions...) A serious post would at least have some text, or make a well-reasoned claim to *something*. Some of the replies in the thread are actually insightful, and have been moderated accordingly.
The original post is pretty much the definition of a troll, and judging by the number and type of replies, a successful one.
"I had been under the impression that engineering degrees were generally for people who wanted to make money (in a normal-ish job) after graduation, while sciences were for people who either wanted to be, or accepted the risk of being in academia for life. Is that not the case?"
I think that anyone who wants an engineering degree for the money will be disappointed. I have a degree in chemical engineering, and I make $55,000 (that is with 10 months of experience). That sounds like a lot for being just out of school, but given the extra effort of obtaining the degree, and the amount of work that is expected from me at my job, I don't think it's a better deal than a liberal arts degree would've been. I think that the value of any degree is what you do with it. If you work to gain valuable experience, advocate yourself, and work well with others, you can make a 6 figure income with any degree.
I am in the field because I am passionate about making peoples lives better, and I feel like engineering accomplishes that. I don't want to work forever in academia, because I feel like all the mindless bureaucracy and politics of the university makes enriching the lives of others nearly impossible. Of course, if I did want to work forever in academics, I could still do that with an engineering degree.
Let me fix that for you... 1) Work 2) Profit! There you go.
Most people aren't thought about after they're gone. "I wonder where Rob got the plutonium" is better than most get.
Ahh, parent poster is a Troll, eh?
Yes, he is a troll. Education does not promise you money, it only promises to educate you if you are willing to be educated. In all of my classes my professors never claimed that after passing the class I would be blessed with high paying jobs. Instead, their claim was, "these are the topics we will cover." How well they covered those topics varied, and obviously some professors did poorly while others did well. But nobody ever said, "learn this and you will make money." As a student, you choose your degree, and you choose what classes you will take. There is no reason to come crying after you graduated to claim that your degree did nothing for you when it was practically your choice all along.
Forbes publisher Rich Karlgaard would probably agree with AC. Is he a troll too?
The article you linked to makes no claims that school is worthless. In fact, the article is brining up a major point that you and the parent missed: if you only are thinking in terms of costs and how much the degree with return in terms of money, then you have to think in terms of return on investment on the degree and the following job because of it compared to whatever alternative plan you have in mind. The option that has the highest return is obviously the option you should take if your only goal is money.
I saw far too many kids there for the party myself... the 'life experience' they called it. We even have online encyclopedias citing which schools paaar-tay the hardest.
I saw a lot of kids partying. But I also saw a lot of those kids failing their classes, dropping out, staying for as long as 6 to 7 years, or ultimately getting a crappy job as a result. The question here is did they turn out better than they would have if they did not go to college? Maybe maybe not. But ultimately, who ever made the choices (parents and the child) are responsible. I'm not going to feel sorry or feel like it is a problem if a kid's parents are uninformed about their kid's choices or the kid does not have the motivation to utilize his resources. That's their business and as far as I can tell that's a hell of a lot better than some of the alternatives.
College is big business. So big in fact that university finances have begun drawing the scrutiny of congress.
Oh, another Harvard, Yale, and Stanford article. What about public schools?
We've even begun exporting American-style higher education.
I don't see anything wrong with it. There are already a lot of international students enrolled everywhere throughout the country. In the same way, there are a lot of American students participating in foreign schools.
In the meantime, there's a lot of kids leaving college with a worthless degree and lots of debt.
I had a friend in college that happened to be a computer science major. But the big thing about her was that she was a girl and she was cute. Her personality was nothing like a geek and she could have easily done something else or fit in with other social groups. Naturally, the question came up, "Why computer science?" Her answer was, "I initially thought about getting another degree but my parents disagreed and said I needed to get something more 'useful.'" In the context she was speaking of, "useful" was a degree that would guarantee a higher salary. Indeed, she did get a job that she didn't mind doing in the software industry and did hit a higher salary. Unlike most people, she actually made the choice based on money and it paid off.
Others do not think like that. Instead they either think college is one of those necessary things or something their parents forced them into. The end result is a kid that partied too much barely finished his degree, and most of all did not learn anything or put the degree to use. I do not think that issue will ever be fixed because some people are that stupid. Ultimately for those people it may not matter because their parents m
Showing interest in indicating intelligence to MENSA is a clear sign of lack of intelligence.
Having a college degree confirms that the bearer can finish college. This isn't trivial: someone who claims to have equivalent knowledge without the degree may, in fact, lack discipline or the ability to embark on long-term projects. Just knowing that someone can do the things required to get a degree is an important piece of positive information above and beyond the demonstrated learning that the degree indicates.