<p>“…but if you can get the hang of it and go to all the tutoring sessions and talk to the profs often, it’s certainly possible to get a 3.4 if you work really (really) hard.”</p>
<p>yeah, and from physics, i’ve learned anything is possible: “hey mom, watch me quantum tunnel through this wall!” <em>breaks down wall</em></p>
<p>here’s my honest assessment of the situation, from the information provided…
you <em>could</em> pull off a 3.4 GPA if you really really worked hard. however, you’d be obsessing about grades so much that it is my opinion that you will not be going for the learning. as such, you’ll graduate with a good GPA and mediocre understanding of the material. you’ll become one of these grads that makes me hit my head against the wall (not in an attempt to quantum tunnel through).</p>
<p>i recognized early on that if i was willing to sacrifice 5-10% of my grades, i could open up 20-30% of my time to really investigate the material in an alternate approach. i only memorized a few formulas through college: f = d(mv)/dt , Q=kdA/dx, etc. i thought it would be a better use of my energy to understand the basis for the subject that we were studying than the material for the test. sometimes this worked really well (compressible flow, fluids, continuum, systems and signals) but sometimes i ate it quite hard on the test (linear algebra, biology, control theory).</p>
<p>i suppose you need to have a bit of <em>faith</em> (god, i hate that word) that after four years and $200k later, what matters to an employer is what you can do. grades in engineering do not correlate well to engineering competence.</p>
<p>Well, I’d have to respectfully disagree that getting above a 3.4 GPA automatically means you care more about grades than about learning and that your understanding of the material is mediocre. That would mean that around 40% of Mudd graduates have mediocre understanding of the material they have studied in classes! In my experience, there is a fairly good correlation between GPA and (perceived) understanding of the material. However, it is true that there are several students who are like RocketDA in that they have solid understanding of the material they want to learn but are rather untraditional in terms of effort in getting good grades. But I would think it is a bit harsh to characterize high GPA as being automatically counterproductive to really understanding the subject matter. Of course I majored in physics, so maybe the experience was a little different for engineering…</p>
<p>Speaking of which Blackroses, I have some remarks for you.</p>
<p>It is natural to be worried and have doubts about your math/science abilities. Almost everyone has them; in my opinion, it is a sign of practical humility and a good thing as long as it is not overboard.</p>
<p>The fact is, everyone struggles or feels stupid at some time or the other during their tenure at Harvey Mudd. So no one would judge you for having difficulty or asking for help, almost everyone is in the same boat. I would be lying to you if I said I think your GPA at HMC would be as high as it would be at any other college were you to put an equal amount of effort into your courses. Your grades probably will drop and you will feel silly at times, but that is perfectly normal, everyone goes through it. </p>
<p>It sounds cliche, but hard work, discipline and persistence from failures and struggles really are the dealbreaker, and you should be fine.</p>
<p>I recently graduated, and looked at my graduation pamphlet. There were about 20 students or so who graduated summa cum laude (with highest distinction), meaning they had at least a 3.7 GPA. I know them all, and I know for sure that all of them were at times stressed out or had difficulty at some time or the other. All of them. But the one thing they had in common (especially the really high ones) was their discipline and persistence and willingness to ask for help when they needed it.</p>
<p>^ thank you. That actually really puts things into perspective for me…</p>
<p>To be honest, for the past two weeks… I’ve been kind of hoping HMC will defer me ED.</p>
<p>I absolutely love HMC, and would be thrilled to go there. The problem is… I’ve been reflecting, and wondering, will I really be happy there? The answer always seemed yes… but then I began to be afraid… what if my work won’t pay off, and I will struggle and not get anywhere? What If I sleep too much instead of working? (Not going out and partying, but actually sleeping… I need a lot of sleep) Even though I want to work my butt off and get the best education i possibly can ( I want to be well rounded and I love the idea of the core) I am still afraid of failing… not struggling, which is inevitable for growth (and humility, as you stated) but I’m afraid of struggling so bad it will be to a point where I will feel helpless. Given, I am a pessimist at times, so I do have to look back on this and reevaluate. However, there is obviously still somewhat of a concern of being afraid of failing at such a hard school.</p>
<p>If I do get defered, I won’t be happy. But I won’t be depressed. If I get in, I’ll be super excited. I guess I just worry too much. I really just want to end up being happy wherever I end up… and I do realize that has a lot to do with mindset.</p>
<p>"That would mean that around 40% of Mudd graduates have mediocre understanding of the material they have studied in classes! "</p>
<p>Unfortunately, I do think 40% of Mudd (engineering) graduates are not that fantastic. I’ve worked with several dozen upper division students doing E80 development from 2006-2009 and had exposure to 80+ sophomore engineers when I proctored 2008/2009. My experiences aren’t coming from a vacuum. I’ve worked with many students and I feel that many don’t retain what they’ve learned in their classes and if they do, they often don’t know how to apply it. This applies to at least half the students.</p>
<p>Now, I still think Mudd is much better than (almost all the) other undergraduate schools for engineering. It is just my rubric for assessment may be a little bit harsh. I think engineering graduates should be able to do certain things upon graduation, and I’ve found that students that obsess about achieving high GPAs tend to get good grades but their focus is <em>different</em>, somehow.</p>
<p>“I do value and respect RocketDA’s opinion a lot. But to be honest, I do take it with a grain of salt. ; )”</p>
<p>Well, part of me feels all warm and fuzzy inside that you value what I have to say. But then again, you’re dissenting from one of the most involved students in designing HMC’s engineering program over the past few years. I’ve spent a lot of time with the dean of students, the engineering dept chair, the engineering clinic director, and head of the hmc design center/program. I may not be a professor, but for an alum I know quite well what metrics the senior engineering faculty use to assess a “good” vs “okay” engineer.</p>
<p>So, take it with a grain of salt. I am simply trying to direct you for the most bang for your buck and the best chances of getting a 5-sigma job out of college.</p>
<p>I applaud you for thinking deeply about these issues at such a young age; most high-schoolers do not have your kind of critical reflection and analysis, I am only just starting to develop this at age 21! And there is nothing wrong with not going to HMC, I truly believe that while requirements may differ from place to place, your education is largely what you put into it. So take what life gives you and go with the flow.</p>
<p>“The problem is… I’ve been reflecting, and wondering, will I really be happy there?”</p>
<p>You know, no one ever said college had to be fun. Work your ass off in college, learn a boat-load, stretch your mind, and apply it & demonstrate your ability. You may not be the happiest person for four years but you’ll be much more happy after when you get paid (well) to do whatever you want to do. </p>
<p>“So take what life gives you and go with the flow.”</p>
<p>Nah, we aren’t some particle that follows our streamline. We are a particle that creates our streamline.</p>
<p>Take life by the horns and show some personal distinction! (This doesn’t necessarily mean Mudd is the solution. It means that you need to take a step back and figure out what matters to you in life, where you are going to make your biggest impact, and how you are going to get there.)</p>
<p>… and I’m a big believer in that the human mind is super-plastic and you can make yourself a “genius” by forcing neural reconnects. (This is of course barring a physiological neural problem)</p>
<p>…and Tiyusufaly,
What I’m about to say is going to destroy your argument AND make you look good at the same time. I know, I’m amazing like that.</p>
<p>Tiyusufaly is/was a remarkable student at HMC and I feel that he excelled in more than his share of subjects. With that said, I think he had a little easier time getting good grades than other people and probably even was able to complement his school work with laboratory experience. Therefore, I think his measure of Mudd’s default difficulty is lower than the rest of us normal folk.</p>
<p>I think it’s true about needing to either like or be good at something, and they tend to go hand in hand (there is this great NYTimes article on this-- about how expertise and high talent is largely driven by being really interested in it). Though I would soften this and say you need not achieve something great, be extremely talented or have extreme liking. That is an unrealistic standard for most people, and completely unnecessary. </p>
<p>But you should really gravitate to what turns you on and/or where you feel talented. Follow your interests and strengths. That will give you a great college experience and a good life. There will be tons of classes you can take to further develop your mental abilities, and you will always be able to find challenging courses, and no matter what path you take, there will likely be really horrible parts and really difficult parts. But when it comes to your major, think about your likes and strengths. </p>
<p>It pains me to hear young people taking themselves towards something they really aren’t interested in…which is how your post read to me…simply because it gives them a job at the end. There are tons and tons and tons of occupations out there, and most of which you can’t even imagine will exist a decade from now. Gravitate to your likes and strengths and your career will show itself.</p>
<p>“It pains me to hear young people taking themselves towards something they really aren’t interested in…which is how your post read to me…simply because it gives them a job at the end. There are tons and tons and tons of occupations out there, and most of which you can’t even imagine will exist a decade from now. Gravitate to your likes and strengths and your career will show itself.”</p>
<p>Whose post are you referring to? If you’re talking about mine, I’m not insinuating that by being unhappy now you’re sacrificing your passions for success after graduation. Quite the contrary. If you really want something, work for it! The grueling work may not be a “fun” experience but it’ll be a good experience and you’ll be happier in the end since you get where you wanted to go. (Yeah yeah yeah, it is about the path more than the destination. This is true… but it doesn’t mean you have to really enjoy the path even if it was really good for you)</p>
<p>I agree with both of you in a way. I mean, there was a post recently in High School Life about this guy with a perfect SAT score who sold some software to a big company, but then ended up being a high school drop out and becoming a farmer.</p>
<p>It just really is an eye opener. What are we striving for? What will really make us happy?</p>
<p>I agree that you do have to sacrifice some fun and games for hard work that does pay off. But what really does make us happy? The answer is different for everyone. I think it’s odd that I’m going through this right now… I have a friend who’s 23 and just graduated with a BS in biology from Stanford… and he doesn’t seem to want to go to med school even though that’s the obvious path. It just isn’t his passion.</p>
<p>I love math and science, don’t get me wrong. I do want to be an engineer, as of now. I really do hope that will make me happy. I guess I’m just at a pivotal point in my life, and I am reflecting on it a lot. Hopefully things will make themselves clear/ things will work out in the end.</p>
<p>While I’m a bit of a latecomer to this discussion, I thought I’d comment a little…</p>
<p>I’m going to go ahead and say, while I certainly know only a very little about engineering, this makes a lot of sense to me just as a general philosophy (and also, I think I have a close friend who’s quite like RocketDA in approach to engineering, though probably disregards school work to an even greater extent than he). </p>
<p>My observation is that while certain classes are so fundamental that literally learning every single bit of what they teach, exactly how they teach it, is fundamental to advancing in one’s field, usually a class is limited by the fact that you have to have a structured curriculum. Parts of it may be of much interest, and others may not be. Which is why I find that the ones with a decent but not too great workload somehow make me take away the most from them, because I can learn the material the way I want to, rather than the way it is fed to me. There is a reason why professors have assigned homework and said “It’s much more important you understand the material than that you get every homework problem solved.” Sometimes, I don’t even feel like doing any of the homework assigned (though this is rarer, and of course one at times has to bite the bullet and just do the work). </p>
<p>The friend of mine into electrical engineering has been working on the material since ages ago, and the number of things he could actually <em>do</em> is phenomenal, but he clearly doesn’t care about everything they do in classes. On a slightly different note, I know a math major who recently got a very good job (graduating this year) in the computer science world, which many would clamor for, and much of what he knows comes from his own learning, as well as lots of work experience.</p>
<p>Realistically, Mudd strikes me as an ultra high workload type of school, and so it would strike my intuition as correct that at times one may have to compromise on things like grades to really get what one wants out of the education. It appears from Rocket’s success in employment that this plan, if well executed, can lead to plenty of good things, i.e. to slightly assuage the fears of those who’d be nervous about being less than obsessive about schoolwork.</p>
<p>You know, despite what I say, I do to a certain extent agree with RocketDA and mathboy98 in that there is not a perfect correlation between GPA and understanding. Several times in classes I had to do things in a slightly different way from lectures/hw or exams to gain an understanding that I felt appropriate (this was particularly the case in chemistry, engineering or biology classes). And sometimes this compromised my grades on exams. So I think they do have a valid point in that there is such a thing as being TOO worried about grades to the extent that one doesn’t really try to understand the fundamentals of the subject, which I believe can hurt you in the long run. </p>
<p>I am in graduate school, and there you oftentimes do have to do things beyond the book or structure of the course. Heck, in grad school oftentimes (in fact, I’d venture to say, most of the time!) there is very little homework and you have to teach yourself practically everything via reading and doing problems that you select yourself. So there are advantages to gaining practice in unstructured, non-linear learning that you yourself guide and set, as that is the most useful and powerful type of learning for real research or engineering jobs or anything in life.</p>
<p>However, I would still maintain that Harvey Mudd classes in general do a pretty good job of making their exams and homework measure whether or not one has truly learned the important fundamentals of a subject. And oftentimes, I find that in a weird sort of way, their structured courses teach one how to learn in an unstructured environment. I feel pretty well prepared for learning on my own without organized teachers in graduate school despite the fact that Harvey Mudd classes had a lot of work and exams and lectures and all that. When I arrived at Mudd, they told us the most important thing we’d learn at the college was “how to learn” and I think the professors have that in mind as they design their curriculum throughout the four years here.</p>
<p>And rocketDA, thanks for your kind remarks, but I assure you I had my fair share of struggles and battles (still do, as a matter of fact).</p>
<p>Right, at times I find the best way to solve a problem I am told about is really something outside the scope of the given course, but I sometimes feel the reason you’re given time to think about them is that you’re meant to actively look for ways to think about it on your own.</p>