<p>disagree with CRDad:</p>
<p>The OP should do one year at a juco and could likely transfer into a transfer-friendly college, such as USC. (Dunno if Mich takes a transfer after one year.) Or two years of A’s and a good essay, and Michigan is a lock. Cornell is even doable.</p>
<p>as said earlier, time for a reality check…for both the op and a number of posters who seem to be drawn into his/her delusion. the dismissive attitude toward higher education is irritating. space in selective colleges is already at a premium - why waste one of the seats on one who cavalierly disses the purpose: preparation (at least for subjects like engineering or science) in proscribed courses of study that allow one to respond to specific questions with (usually) quantitative answers. maybe more understadable if the interest was in self-expressive subjects (art, literature, etc). as a prof chem eng, not impressed here - do the world a favor and continue with the “alternative” approach you have actively (and apprently correctly) chosen.</p>
<p>I agree he would be bored to death at community college, but the alternative is to find a top notch university that is going to overlook the fact that he has accomplished virtually nothing to prove that he can handle school. If he can’t find that or doesn’t like the choices in that category, he is running out of options.</p>
<p>I don’t know why everyone seems to think the OP is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Yes, a 35 is impressive, but there are a lot of high scorers out there, and higher scorers who have the accomplishments to back those test scores up. If you don’t do the work, you’ll fail–at any level of education (high school, college, med, grad, law, whatever). Granted, there may be less “busy work,” but there will still be work.</p>
<p>Bluebayou, with all due respect, I think that you are wrong. </p>
<p>The kid has a very lofty goal. Getting a faculty position is one of the hardest jobs to get and keep. As a professor, your whole curriculum vitae stays with you. How many professors at research institutions have a junior college on their resume? Not too many. An environment with slow learners is not stimulating enough for a future genomics professor and I believe that it would be an intellectual stain on his CV. His high school record is not part of his permanent CV and becomes irrelevant as soon as he is accepted into serious college. </p>
<p>I think Purdue, Case and the other schools that I mentioned are attainable, and they are surely a better route. The clock is ticking though, so I’d get moving because many are rolling admissions and the bar only rises with time. These schools are not in the business of rejecting kids who have demonstrated this much potential. Also, many of their graduates are successful professors, so this is a road well traveled. </p>
<p>I can see success at any serious research university undergraduate leading to an MIT or Stanford caliber institution for graduate school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>First of all, we try to help each other on this board, and the OP is one the seeking advice. Beating him down serves no purpose. </p>
<p>Those others who have the accomplishments can probably get into a more competitive school than Purdue or Case. Some of those will choose Purdue and Case anyway. They are good schools and get results. Purdue and Case are much easier to get into than to get through. They may be an opportunity for redemption for kids like this. I see no reason to continue to berate the guy. </p>
<p>I stand by my suggestions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Research is work; being a professor and doing research is a job.</p>
<p>I think your ideas are excellent, CRD, as are others that have been posted. I think the problem is that the OP is not looking for “redemption”, but instead holds the whole system in contempt. That’s a position that may be justified (or not) but is not going to work in his/her favor when a place in the system is what is sought. </p>
<p>Sometimes what some see as a beating is, to others, just a reality check.</p>
<p>(I would be surprised if he were admitted at Case.)</p>
<p>University College London, ranked 4th in the world by Times Higher Education. </p>
<p>Quoting from their website:
“To be eligible for consideration students must have usually obtained passes in four, full year Advanced Placement (AP) examinations at grades 4/5”</p>
<p>OP meets that qualification. Don’t you think it’s worth at least investigating? Deadline is January 15. </p>
<p>Since in the UK, you only study one subject, it may be just the ticket for the OP who seems very focused on science.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Case risks nothing by admitting this full-pay student. They don’t have people banging down the doors to get in. They generally have to give merit aid to get the students they want. This one is strictly business for them.</p>
<p>Yeah, definitely worth investigating. Being a student who can pay in full won’t hurt either. Good luck to the OP.</p>
<p>If OP is really some kind of genius (hey, maybe he is), ANY option he has at this point is going to bore him to death. Sorry, but that’s what a 2.5 gets you? </p>
<p>No-one succeeds in life on pure natural talent alone, you also need to do the grind work. If OP cannot handle a year of community college to attain his goal of attending a good university, then his goal of attending a good university is empty. Sometimes, in life, we are bored to death - sometimes we have to accept the consequences of our actions. Additionally, having a high level of bitterness, contempt, etc. toward anything as the OP does is going to hold him back in life from success and I think if he can’t get over those feelings he’ll never be truly successful/happy. That is just my opinion. </p>
<p>I empathize with him in many ways actually and I would say, take it from someone who’s been there, stop hating, learn to be gracious, learn to make the best of everything.</p>
<p>My two cents worth. I am a prof and do research for a living. </p>
<p>Obviously the OP is very bright, and surely bright enough for any academic endeavor he wants. </p>
<p>The next academic step is not going to stain a cv. No one cares about your ug on your cv. You can go to cc or whatever to start. Not an issue at all.</p>
<p>But while I think the OP has the brightness for his goals, and lots of options available to him, I’m not sure he has the personality for it (e.g. the self-discipline, the willingness to follow conventional rules). And maybe the OP isn’t sure what it takes to succeed as a teacher and researcher. I entirely agree that a lot of formal schooling, from HS through to the PhD can be boring, irrelevant, and mind-numbingly rote and banal…and its frustrating. But, unfortunately, I think if you aren’t able or willing to jump through the hoops set up by the system (regardless of how you feel about them), I think you won’t make it to your goal. Simply too many gatekeepers to please along the way. </p>
<p>Did I mention hoops? You already know about exams, essays, teachers rules. University will likely be more of the same. And going into sciences…rules of the lab, lab reports, learning many specific techniques…tons more arbitrary rule following (some of which you’ll get and understand, probably some you won’t). Add in orals, and comprehensive exams, and working with senior others towards publications. Trying to publish? No, it’s not just thinking big ideas and creativity. It’s first being someone’s peon in their lab, gradually showing responsibility with mundane stuff and working up to more interesting stuff. Same with the knowledge…lots and lots and lots of basics just to get to the ‘good stuff’. </p>
<p>Journals are extremely narrow in what they deem worthy of publishing, from format and rules of a decent journal article, to what are considered acceptable ideas (most of which are very incremental, adding a little brick to a vast body of existing work). Each field has its own very strong norms-- if you read those norms accurately and apply them, and you have a valued idea, you can publish. If you don’t, you won’t publish, no one will read your work and you’ll not be hired (or if you are hired, you’ll eventually lose your job. While research sounds all lofty and autonomous and perhaps free-spirited in creative thought… and we can watch movies and read great books about amazing discoveries…everyday life of a publishing researcher can be shockingly conservative with a ton of rule following, big and small. </p>
<p>Sure you need to be passionate and creative, but even brilliant ideas too ahead of their time are often rejected because they don’t yet “fit”. The paradigm of the day rules and if you buck the paradigm, no one will appreciate or reward your insights. If you get to tenure, you supposedly have more liberty to do what you want, since you will now have lifetime employment and the freedom to not jump through hoops anymore. You’ll have the cred to buck the paradigm. But the sad thing is those that get that far often seem to have spent so long playing by the rules that they have become socialized into the same system (and now are as conventional as those before them). </p>
<p>I don’t mean to be so discouraging and cynical. I actually quite love my career as a researcher and love the freedom and creativity. But I can also see that it requires a HUGE amount of self-discipline and willingness to play by others’ rules for the most part…just to get the privilege to one day not play by the rules. I’m not justifying the system nor saying it should be that, but it is.</p>
<p>Find a community college and take a class there second semester - I think you’ll like it better than high school. My S also scored 35 on his ACT, but does not have a 4.0 gpa. I don’t think he’s a genius, just a BWRK that tests well. We have always encouraged him to take the most rigorous classes available because it really is about the learning and not the grade. An A is nice, but a B is better if you learned more. Frankly, some of the requirements for classes in high school are ridiculous, depending on where you go. He is taking a class at community college (he has taken all the APs offered in this subject at hs) and is really enjoying it and learning in a new way (i.e. all the work assigned is actually relevant and not busy work) and getting an A in the class. Some colleges allow you to automatically transfer with two years of good grades at community college. Check it out. Good luck to you! I think you’re going to find the next four years better than the last four.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, it wouldn’t be a first time!</p>
<p>However, I think we only disagree to a degree. IMO, two years of A’s at UMich (or Cornell) Engineering & great recs will beat four years of A’s at ASU. But that is just my opinion, (which certainly could be wrong, but Starbright suggests that a juco is not an automatic exclusion to Academe). However, I recommend the juco route bcos the OP needs to learn how to deal with the real world of academe, which means going to class and actually working in class and completing all the busy work assigned. It also means working with other students, and not just self-study. (Otherwise, and online degree would be best.) The solution to being “bored” is to take 2x the course load, and perhaps finish in one year instead of two. The second reason I suggest a juco is the $, which as the OP mentions, can work for him/her. Why pay OOS prices when the instate public is world-class at instate prices?</p>
<p>From my (very) limited experience in research and publishing, I completely agree, starbright.</p>
<p>*I’m not sure he has the personality for it (e.g. the self-discipline, the willingness to follow conventional rules). *</p>
<p>I had the same concern in an earlier post. Schools will look at that ACT 35 (deep penetration into the 99th percentile) and then look at the 2.5 GPA, and think, “This is a student who has an attitude about doing what he’s been asked to do.”</p>
<p>There was a student at my kids’ high school - PERFECT SAT - but, he refused to do assignments that he “didn’t like” or whatever, and his GPA suffered. If he had “played the game,” he could have gone anywhere, but he ended up at a 3rd tier school because of his GPA (which was around a 3.0)</p>
<p>OP, I want to take back what I said about your “personality”. In re-reading my post, I think that is way harsh and unfair. Young people are still growing into their skin…and becoming who they will be. Oh the stories I could tell you of what I and my peers were like back as teenagers! You’d never imagine the adults we turned into (for better or for worse!). So I think the last thing you need is a stranger such as myself trying to tell you what your personality is and what you can’t do in life because of it. So can I back up? </p>
<p>Let me just say this instead: from the bit you’ve shared, you sound like you haven’t yet been in a place where you have had the motivation and/or ability to jump through hoops required of you in regular school (for whatever reason, but maybe you know best). That motivation or ability may change or it may not change; it might be in your control or it might not be. And if you continue with your approach, you may very well carve a really cool unpredicted path in life! Who are we to judge? But I just wanted to explain that from my vantage point it seems extremely difficult to get to where you think you want to be (in my occupation specifically) by continuing with the approach you’ve taken in HS. I know my occupation and the industry very well (I don’t, however, know you). That is all.</p>
<p>OP, I do think that an alternative college experience might fit you. Please look into one if you’re not familiar with them: Regents in New York is the old grandaddy. There’s also Charter Oak in CT and Thomas Edison in NJ. But, besides from that, there are a number of universities that have distance programs. I realize these are not prestigious universities-- but they are accredited and, in the case of Regents, will grant a degree entirely based on testing. (There are distribution requirements but they can be fulfilled through testing.) I think this is a valid option for you and, from there, you can move into a traditional Masters.</p>
<p>OP - Good advice above. I don’t see you succeeding at most engineering schools, but that doesn’t mean that a year or two would do you any harm. A significant obstacle will be having to give up your primary source of learning … stimulus outside of school. Schools like Michigan Tech, Rose-Hulman and UM Rolla aren’t exactly located in centers of culture and commerce.</p>