<ol>
<li><p>A 2.4 in Engineering is not failing. A 2.4 in Engineering from the University of Michigan is not bad, it’s actually quite good. (note, Engineering is probably the hardest undergrad major, and IIRC, UMich has a damn good engineering school). </p></li>
<li><p>Getting a 3.5 GPA in college is not that difficult, if you plan correctly. Listen to futurenyustudent.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Additionally, if you can manage to take any freshman-level social science class, getting a 3.5 GPA as long as you put in the required effort is a piece of cake. In fact, I think it would be harder to get a 2.4 in a hard engineering class than a 3.5 in these classes.</p>
<p>There are also other classes like astronomy or dance which are widely known to be easy A’s. As long as you can avoid writing or math, acing should not be difficult. </p>
<p>Also, I strongly suspect pierre and marc are wrong. While the basics of what you learn at MIT and what you learn everywhere else are the same, there will almost certainly be a different level of understanding if you go take a Calc course at MIT versus a Calc course at Boise State. </p>
<p>Finally, I warn against deciding your major before you go to college. While it is good to have goals, I suggest taking classes in other majors which you may want to go to if accounting fails, or if you find you hate accounting. Switching majors is very common.</p>
<p>those classes you speak of are mainly electives that you can take. The core curriculum is essentially the same.</p>
<p>If you want to get into theory, all schools for mathematics have theory. Calculus has been here for a long time. The rules don’t change, hence, any school can put a course on it. Check any of MIT’s notes on calculus courses you taken, you will notice everything is quite similar to what you have taken previously.</p>
<p>. </p>
<p>Do essentially “dumber” people go to boise state than MIT? facts prove yes, your comparing the majority that takes liberal arts/political science classes to a school that is extremely focused in the sciences. The few that take the same path at boise state however do the same exact classes at MIT.</p>
<p>Calculus in the other side of the world is the same as here, things dont change.</p>
<p>Calculus of several variables. Vector algebra in 3-space, determinants, matrices. Vector-valued functions of one variable, space motion. Scalar functions of several variables: partial differentiation, gradient, optimization techniques. Double integrals and line integrals in the plane; exact differentials and conservative fields; Green’s theorem and applications, triple integrals, line and surface integrals in space, Divergence theorem, Stokes’ theorem; applications. </p>
<p>This is Calc 2 at MIT.</p>
<p>Normal calc sequences do not touch Divergence Theorem, Stokes Theorem, conservative fields, or exact differentials. And I really doubt most calc sequences are going to go anywhere near into as much depth on series as I expect MIT to. And most calc sequences don’t really use matrices either, even if they are basically the greatest thing ever.</p>
<p>A 2.4 in any major is terrible. I’m in a top 10 engineering program, and nobody here is going to react favorably to a 2.4. A lot of the companies that recruit here don’t even bother to interview anybody with less than 3.0 (hell, I have had friends who got job offers rescinded because they had less than 3.0). </p>
<p>I would love to give you advice, but I got my 3.6 in spite of my study habits. I don’t think I have studied for more than one night for any test in my collegiate career.</p>
<p>Are you claiming that Cornell is easier than Michigan? That’s a rather bold assertion. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t say it’s impossible to get a job with a 2.4. I’m implying that the fact that so many companies have GPA cutoffs well above 2.4 indicates that a 2.4 isn’t a “good” GPA, at all.</p>
<p>“Are you claiming that Cornell is easier than Michigan? That’s a rather bold assertion.”</p>
<p>Hmmm… I take it back. The admitted student test scores seem to be a bit higher at Cornell than I had thought. </p>
<p>“I didn’t say it’s impossible to get a job with a 2.4. I’m implying that the fact that so many companies have GPA cutoffs well above 2.4 indicates that a 2.4 isn’t a “good” GPA,
at all.”</p>
<p>Fair enough, I just wanted to make sure no one had the false impression that there were no jobs for someone with a 2.4.</p>
<p>marc936, you’re an idiot. whatever you’re taking is NOT the same as students at MIT are, at least in terms of depth. I bet what you learn in school is simply compute the flux given some triple integrals without knowing what they really are. Most engineering intro classes are curved. By your logic, an avg calc student at your school will do just as well as an avg MIT student, simply because they all learn the same thing? I don’t know how MIT calc exams are, but I’ll assure you that they’re WAY more conceptual rather than simple computations(which anyone can do) like you implied.</p>
<p>after this semester im on my senior year in college as a chemical engineer, and i am more than confident that i can compete with an MIT student in my field.</p>
<p>an average calc student that just wants to pass the class= yes they will fail at it, same as if they retook tests 2 years later</p>
<p>a student that actually wants to learn calculus= then yes they would understand it just as well as an MIT student.</p>
<p>I find it hilarious how people think because of being prestigious, people are automatically are considered as gods to whoever goes there. Maybe because most of their fields require the knowledge of calculus to do well, and majority of other majors just use it as a requirement. In the end, whoever wants to learn it will realize that learning it from a cc to MIT, and from here or india that calculus is the same thing.</p>
<p>and typically, whoever took time to read the book can quickly realize theorems, proofs, and conceptual knowledge is just as simple as computing it</p>
<p>Oh, I forgot one: vigorously use your Pass/Fail option. If the professor sucks, you don’t need the class for your major and/or minor, and you can still exercise this option but it’s past the drop deadline, go Pass/Fail. Better than a C.</p>
Have you ever taken an upper level math course? Ever? I mean, something that actually requires theorems, proofs, and conceptual knowledge? (and no, freshman calc doesn’t count, neither does diff-eq or linear algebra or basic multivariable calc).</p>
<p>??? </p>
<p>Yes, you can learn whatever it is they teach at MIT in their calc sequence. It’s doable, but for the vast majority of colleges, you’re going to need an extra quarter (perhaps 2) to get to that level of detail.</p>
<p>Also, yeah, a 2.4 isn’t good, but if you get a degree in engineering from Michigan, it still counts, and GPA is one of those things that I imagine is less and less useful as time goes on. (so is having been in college in general though)</p>
<p>You are clearly one of those people who thinks that “an integral is the area under the curve” is conceptual knowledge. Actual theorems, actual proofs, and actual conceptual knowledge are much harder than any computation you will ever do.</p>
<p>Too bad that less than half of the work they do is even from their textbook. Unless you take the honors level course, in which case none of the work they do is from the textbook.</p>
<p>marc936, rofl. You do know that what you learn heavily depend on your peers as well right? Like I said, in a curved class, students at MIT would probably study their asses off to beat their peers. If they were at an easier school, they don’t have to dig as deep, and still beat the crap out of the avg. Both schools’ students are learning calculus? Yeah. Learning the same thing? NO.
ps. that pset hw looks sick.</p>
<p>now, i love how you pulled the homework out of calculus with theory, even though i just posted the listings of courses needed for chemical engineer, yet no calculus with theory is needed. Good job proving it by showing an elective class homework. </p>
<p>and square, you do realize generally brighter people would go to MIT rather than a cc, so yeah, you send them anywhere im sure they will beat the crap out of the average, but it doesn’t mean the stuff they learn will be lightyears ahead, they just have to compete more</p>
<p>guys, you’re arguing with someone who transferred all over the place its not worth it; good luck i’m sure the people arguing with you will be earning more in several years. its no use to argue over a thread, go work on some theory based calculus, perhaps tact as well?</p>