<p>^@12345fed: I agree to the statement that “if you don’t make usabo that does not imply you don’t have scientific potential” but I do think that making usabo is a strong indicator of critical thinking skills if you make top 20. there’s a lot more than just memorization involved, and this comes from someone who’s done it for a while.</p>
<p>Similarly, while the statement “if you are very smart you will likely do well in siemens/intel sts” is true, it is my understanding from being involved in these competitions also that success is more largely dependent on being lucky enough with finding the right mentor and having receptive judges, especially in chemistry/biology. </p>
<p>And also, being a usamo qualifier and usabo semi finalist alone isn’t going to get even close to cutting it anymore. don’t get me wrong, i’m not making any personal judgements. this is just from the trends that i’ve seen in admissions among my own friends this year… maybe that might’ve been an near auto-admit 5-10 years ago, but nowadays, there’s going to have to be much more to the app than that… there are lots of insanely smart kids out there.</p>
<p>@kcanand11: As DarkSigma pointed out most of my analysis comes from what I see around me, whats happening to kids in my school., my region etc. AMC qualifiers are a definite for Caltech which I think is a great school at a low cost. I love California. USAMO qualifiers usually end up in MIT. As for USABO semifinalists by itself, I am not sure if it is a guarantee but that in combination with USAMO increases your chances, I think. On that note, I really wish CEE will announce top 50 and top 150 which will increase its value by a lot. Did anyone contact CEE on that?</p>
<p>As we all know this is only one part of the puzzle and the rest of the pieces should also match, i.e., scores, gpa etc., I have also seen kids who pick up some obscure activity and go to the top and end up at Yale and Stanford. But if someone is reading Biology textbooks cover to cover and enjoys doing it, why can’t that be a passion? Do you have to win an award to show your passionate? </p>
<p>@DarkSigma: If you need luck in research what about the kids who have missed the cutoff by a couple of points. There is always an element of luck in everything. Why should winning awards be the only indicator of passion?</p>
<p>@Opinion559 - You don’t “qualify” for the AMC - you pay a 10 dollar registration fee. I presume you meant the USAMO. While I don’t know from personal experience (this is the first year that we’ve had any USAMO/USAJMO qualifiers, and they’re all sophomores or younger) it seems somewhat difficult to believe that simply qualifying for USAMO - not to trivialize USAMO - would allow one to “automatically” get into a good school. While being USAMO + USABO semifinalist is certainly a plus on one’s college app, I agree with darksigma in that it is by no means a guarantee of admission. </p>
<p>Passion is great and all, but unless you have the award, a college can’t see it. Ultimately, I could love - for example, math - and I could be really good at it. However, to a college (which obviously can’t take the time to individually meet and spend time with every applicant) a student who simply says “I am passionate” will not look as strong as the student who says “I am passionate AND I have the awards to prove it”.</p>
<p>The very fact that a meteor hasn’t crashed into the Earth in the minute it’s taken me to write this post is a sign of luck. The fact that I haven’t collapsed of a hitherto unexpressed genetic condition while writing this post is also luck. In most activities, however, those who are more skilled tend to make their own luck. If I had to guess, I’d say that darksigma probably could’ve been incredibly unlucky on some of his guesses on the semis and still made it to camp. This is in relative contrast to activities like science fair, where presentation ability, politics/connections (at least in my region), and whether of not your project cures a disease tend to have some weight as well. </p>
<p>@Opinion 559 - I’m with you on the Top 50/Top 150 thing. Keep in mind, however, that there may be practical concerns preventing it. Additionally, CEE does release the histograms (which ameliorates it somewhat). </p>
<p>I hope none of this was offensive - this is just my point of view.</p>
<p>I meant making the AMC 10/AMC 12 cutoff and become an AIME qualifier. USAMO is one level higher than that and so that should cont for something.</p>
<p>AS far as research goes, as long as you pick an original idea and do quality work and having the writing skills to present it well, you will be appreciated. However, in an exam setting there is no way to exhibit your knowledge other than to make the cutoffs. Since luck was mentioned in the context of research, I brought up the fact that doing well in exams also involve a lot of luck. </p>
<p>Yes, unfortunately you do need awards to show that you have a passion for something because of the number of applications they have to process each year.</p>
<p>Can some one help me with the following question:</p>
<p>Which of the following is a feature of the phospholipid bilayer of a cell membrane?
a. Hydrophobic phosphate groups are found on the exterior of the bilayer.
b. Hydrophilic fatty acids are found in the interior of the bilayer.
c. Phospholipids in the bilayer often have non-polar molecules attached to the phosphate group.
d. Phospholipids in the bilayer have three fatty-acid tails which are hydrophobic.
e. Phospholipids in the bilayer are insoluble in water because of the large number of non-polar C-H bonds in their fatty-acid tails.</p>
<p>If I’m not mistaken, usually polar (often charged) molecules are attached to the phosphate group (e.g. choline). A and B aren’t true, D isn’t true (they only have 2), so the answer must be E.</p>
<p>You are correct. Answer is indeed E. I thought part of Phospholipids are soluble in water and E can not be the answer. However, it turns out that I was not fully correct.</p>
<p>I’m interested in doing USABO 2014. I currently read C/R [7th Edition] about 2-3 hours a week and about 5-6 hours on the weekends. I also have a bunch of botany textbooks and a mom who has a Cambridge PhD in Bio+Masters in Botany. </p>
<p>Are my current studying habits enough?
I’m a current freshman [taking exam as a sophomore] and taking Honors Biology, but there are things that I simply can’t wrap my head around [Cellular respiration, light-independent and light-dependent reactions. Plus any chemical equations. But C/R has helped me a lot, considering I started like 4 days ago].</p>
<p>@ Apollo: If you think that strangers who have zero knowledge of you as a person can gauge your abilities better than you can, I suggest that you check your confidence in yourself and your own drive to succeed. </p>
<p>Those who are confident in their abilities will not ask others to confirm it for them.</p>
<p>@Apollo11 - I agree with 12345fed. However, just as a general rule, the amount of time you put in isn’t really as important as how much you retain, and (more importantly, imo) how good you are at - forgive the colloquialism - BS. In all seriousness - you can get through a surprisingly large number of USABO Semi questions (cough cough genetics, etho and eco cough) without having actually read C&R on those sections. I personally feel that I got more points from random background experience than from actual C&R knowledge (with the notable exception of plant physiology). </p>
<p>Feel free to disagree with me - there are many on this thread far more experienced than I, so defer to their opinion. Also, like 12345fed said, ultimately it’s you who know what you can do. Asking us what your chances are is pointless unless we personally know you (in which case the act of posting it on CC is pointless :P). Good luck studying!</p>
<p>Perhaps “BS” isn’t the best term for it. It’s more of a weird amalgam of logical reasoning, intuition, and faux-determination/overconfidence often referred to as “BS”,“common sense” (a misnomer because it isn’t particularly common), or most commonly, “luck”.</p>
<p>I said camp is a guarantee for HPYS-M meaning at least one, maybe not all, will definitely admit you. You are at MIT right?</p>
<p>Silverturtle’s guide to college admissions was one of my sources when quoting this. Also, this is definitely true for the kids who have gone to camp from my school.</p>
<p>General question:
Is Campbell Biology difficulty to understand if I am to self-study?</p>
<p>@Opinion559
I believe you have misinterpreted Silverturtle’s guide, as he said "Nonetheless, succeeding in well-known competitions can be highly beneficial. "… “As is the case with IMO, those receiving medals at IBO generally have their pick among the top colleges.”.
In general, those who succeed in these competitions are typically strong academically, but correlation does not imply causation when it comes to Olympiads and college admissions.</p>
<p>@FlyingWombat: There is a strong correlation between camp and college admissions in my school. Everyone has the SAT scores and GPA, so you need something unique and this can be it. More than that I am not an admissions officer and any more details will reveal my identity which is not the purpose of CC. </p>
<p>This thread is for biology lovers taking USABO and this conversation can continue in a chancing thread.</p>
<p>Does anyone know of a good resource detailing the flower formulae for various families of plants? I’ve been looking around, but haven’t been able to find a consistent source.</p>
<p>I read somewhere that the highest score on the IBO Theory is often around 70-ish percent. Assuming you’re referring to USABO Finals, does that mean that the highest score at finals is even lower?</p>