<p>Does anyone know if Ross courses are calc based at all?</p>
<p>I’m 99.9% sure that they’re not, except for possibly a select few. I’m sure you could avoid pretty much all math if you wanted.</p>
<p>
If this is true, what’s so fantastic about Ross?</p>
<p>^People graduate and make a lot of money.</p>
<p>It’d be nice if they knew the basic principles behind that money. I find it very unfortunate that those people are able to come out of that school with anything less than Calc 2.</p>
<p>Quantitative analysts do incredibly complicated analyses. Actuarial scientists solve dynamic mathematical problems for a living.</p>
<p>Zero calculus in Ross.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ross kids don’t do these jobs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There isn’t really much calculus behind “the money” with which Ross kids work. They typically do investment banking, consulting, corporate finance, or marketing (don’t touch anything to do w/ calc). Even the ones that do trading typically don’t work with any calculus – especially if you’re working with vanilla equities or bonds.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That said, I agree with you. Math is great and very useful. Opens doors.</p>
<p>If this is true, then why bother making people take calc I as a pre-req?</p>
<p>^then why bother making pre-med students take calc 1? Calc 1, first year chemistry, first year english are pretty much universal across college freshman across america. Its just general ed courses that almost everyone does regardless of their major.</p>
<p>For the same reason trading firms recruit at universities (you don’t need a college degree to trade… some finance/economics is useful, but by no means necessary). It’s a barrier that separates the smarter people from the not-as-smart people.</p>
<p>
I’d dispute the chem requirement, but I agree on the whole.</p>
<p>
I’d also dispute the definition of “smart”. There are a whole lot of people from Ivies that are as dumb as rocks. But who cares so long as you’re a rich, white male?</p>
<p>
I’d make on argument beyond that, though. Calculus is one of those things that should be taught to business majors by principle.</p>
<p>“I’d dispute the chem requirement, but I agree on the whole.”</p>
<p>If we’re going to dispute, I’d dispute the English. </p>
<p>“I’d also dispute the definition of “smart”. There are a whole lot of people from Ivies that are as dumb as rocks. But who cares so long as you’re a rich, white male?”</p>
<p>I’ve been told that apparently these places prefer females and URMs (I assume Finance industry URMs are the same as University URMs)…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m sorry, people from Ivies do NOT get into trading firms if they’re dumb as rocks. If you’re an idiot, it will come out in the interview. Trading firms do NOT let idiots in. I think you may be confusing trading firms with financial firms in general, in which case you may be less wrong, because idiots do sometimes get into certain financial firms if they are very personable/likable and can BS very well in an interview. However, idiots will not be able to BS their way through trading interviews that require answering brain teasers/probability questions, such as the one below, quickly.</p>
<p>Q: When 13 is inputted into a certain formula, the result is 7. Under the same formula, 2352 yields 16, 246 yields 14, 700 yields 16, and 1030 yields 14.</p>
<p>If 9304 is inputted, what would be the result?</p>
<p>Hmmm… What is it? I was going about it by trying to figure out a formula, which I assume isn’t the right way to do it…</p>
<p>
I wasn’t speaking of your money brokers (although i’m not fond of them either). The behavior of entire universities over decades was on the chopping block.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ll give a hint tomorrow if no one has gotten it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ok well then I’m not really sure what you what you’re trying to say. I was presenting an analogy to the Ross requiring Calc I topic: ivies tend to have the smartest people (along with the likes of MIT, Stanford, etc.), on average, which is why top firms recruit there. It is analogous to Ross requiring Calc I – it’s a tool to try to narrow down the pool of candidates. Were you disagreeing?</p>
<p>Are realistic Ross hopefuls (not that guy who had a 3.6/26 who got into LSA off of the wait list) failing Calc I? </p>
<p>The deal with the function… here’s a function (piecewise):</p>
<p>For x == 13, y = 7
For x == 2352, y = 16
For x == 246, y = 14
For x == 700, y = 16
For x == 1030, y = 14
For x != 13, 2352, 246, 700, 1030, y = whatever the hell I want.</p>
<p>There has to be more information than what you gave.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nope. Each input has exactly one output (obviously not a one-to-one relationship though). For x != the x’s in the question, each x has a particular y. It’s a hard problem, but that’s all the information you need. It will become very apparent once you know the answer. Definitely tricky though.</p>
<p>^??? Can you elaborate further on “the x’s in the question, each x has a particular y?” If that just means that some value of y exists for every x then…</p>
<p>For x == 13, y = 7
For x == 2352, y = 16
For x == 246, y = 14
For x == 700, y = 16
For x == 1030, y = 14
For x != 13, 2352, 246, 700, 1030, y = 11</p>
<p>So the answer is 11?</p>
<p>19?</p>
<p>10 char</p>