@Data10 not sure where you went to college but I assure you that at Cal the most common grade wasn’t an A for intro Chem, or calculus or linear algebra for that matter. I think UMich is not much different from Cal.
Just so happen that my kiddo took linear algebra and differential equation and Chem 1A as a freshman at Cal this past semester and managed to get an A on both. She thinks only 20 % of the students in the class got A (I am sure someone can pull up the stats for those classes at various universities). She was advised to take math 1B calculus first before jumping into linear algebra and differential equation, she ignored that advice and thank goodness it turned out okay. But at the same time her HS friends who also took AP Calculus BC and also got 5 in AP exams, took calculus again at their college and struggled to get a B. Math is hard. We are lucky that our kids have math brains.
@ucbalumnus Interesting about different linear algebra classes. At Bowdoin there’s just one type and really only a math major would take it. All proofs and matrices. S19 said there were “hardly any numbers at all”. Lol. With no engineering there, I think math after Calc is geared towards math majors.
@homerdog my kid isn’t a math major but premed requires that you have college level math. And since she already took AP Calculus BC in HS, she feels that she would be “cheating” if she took calculus again.
According to Berkeleytime.com, the most common grades were as follows. A appears to be the most common grade in the intro math classes, while B appears to be the most common grade in the intro chem class. Note that I listed the total for all semester + all instructors. Certain individual classes are notably different from the average – some higher and some lower.
Berkeley Grade Distribution
Math 1A (Calculus) – A is most common grade (18% A, 36% A+/A/A-)
Math 54 (Linear Algebra) – A is most common grade (15% A, 32% A+/A/A-)
Chem 1A (General Chem) – B is most common grade (18% B, 16% A)
Berkeley and Michigan are both known for harsh grading in the context of the portion of students doing A quality work. Publics as whole are generally known for harsher grading than privates. I attended Stanford. The corresponding grade distributions for Stanford as listed on Edusalsa (old, grades have likely increased since then) are as follows. I listed the version of intro chem I took, which was accelerated. The slow version lists a B+ as the most common grade.
Stanford Grade Distribution (old)
Math 21 (Slow version of Calc I) – B is most common (21% B, 48% B+/B/B-)
Math 51 (Calc/Linear Algebra) – A is most common grade (24% A, 46% A+/A/A-)
Chem 31X (Acc. Chem Principles) – A most common (27% A, 41% A+/A/A-)
While engineering is certainly a factor in how many kids take math classes, another key factor is the college’s size. Large colleges have more students taking intro math classes, with different HS math backgrounds and different planned majors/careers, so they often offer several different intro math sequences. For example, a Stanford student might choose any of the following linear algebra sequences:
Math 51-53 – differential and integral calculus in several variables, linear algebra, and ordinary differential equations (no emphasis on proofs)
Math 61-63CM – covers the material of the Math 50 series at a much more advanced level with an emphasis on rigorous proofs and conceptual arguments
Math 61-63DM – covers the same linear algebra material as the Math 60CM series and otherwise focuses on topics in discrete mathematics, algebra, and probability theory at an advanced level with an emphasis on rigorous proofs
CME 102-104 – versions of classes above that emphasize applied mathematics using Matlab, which I’d expect to be the more common usage for engineering jobs
I agree that my D and her group lucked out with the salaries they are earning right out of school…especially as biology, sociology, and history majors. She is actually saving a lot of money, which will come in handy when she returns to school. The salaries that they are earning are definitely not the norm.
One of her friends was a psych major who is now teaching (k-12) on the campus of a major university. She’s not making a lot, but it’s enough to live on her own.
Her other friend from undergrad (May graduate) was a sociology major. She’s working as a college advisor in two different high schools through an organization. She isn’t making a lot, but makes enough to pay her basic expenses. She plans to head back to school in a few years.
Another friend who just graduated with her works in a tutoring center (bio major) and is heading back to school shortly.
D’s roommate graduated from an Ivy League school (HPY) as a biology major. She spent some time doing research and is now working for a startup organization doing some kind of data analysis.
In our city it is not uncommon for biology majors to work with university researchers for a few years following graduation. Most eventually return to school. My D had an opportunity to work in genetic counseling research, but the offer came after she began her current job and she decided to stay.
I figured I would post a few updates about recent graduates in biology, sociology, history, and psychology.
FWIW, this isn’t always true. My Research U lad reluctantly sat in on a humanities class with one of his LAC brothers fearing he’d be out of place because he hadn’t read the material ahead of time for discussion, etc. When he came out we asked him about his experience and he gave us quite the earful about how he was incredibly disappointed - the main focus being how there was a lot more discussion in his own classes. At the LAC it was basically lecture. His brother assured us it was a normal class.
This will, I know, be a shocking revelation, but not all LACs are the same, not all research universities are the same, not all regional comprehensives are the same, not all community colleges are the same, not all…
This is what I would expect. I supposed I don’t consider 15, 16% as “most common”, even takin into account the A-, still less than 1/3. I thought “most common” means the majority, or at least more than 50%. But I am not the data person.
@Data10 those numbers are frankly shocking to me. DS19 took Linear Algebra this past semester. There are 2 course codes one for engineers and one for everyone else but they are the same course. I don’t know the overall course average but for the midterms and final they were C/B-/B.
He was recently contacted by the chair of the Physics department congratulating him on his achievement in his first semester Physics course. According to the chair for DS’s particular Physics course (for Chemical/Physical Sciences and is the same course as the one the engineers take) 13% scored an A or better.
Per @ucbalumnus, Linear Algebra taught for math majors can be the first real (e.g. abstract) math course in the sequence, where they teach about proofs. Lots of math before that like calculus is usually taught as functional math (useful for physics and engineering, though at my alma mater, there was a special track for math majors).
Back to the lawyer’s advice linked to in Post 160, I suggested that ShawSon who was in interested in behavioral econ take a math course every semester for a few reasons: 1) there is a math ability that some of the family and he clearly had it; 2) I told him that no one from the outside knows whether an econ major is smart even if they do well but everyone knows a math major is smart; and 3) if he wanted to go to econ grad school, they care more about math ability than performance in undergrad econ classes. He thus became an accidental math major and discovered his abilities there – math doesn’t require a lot of reading which was good for a dyslexic kid. More interesting, said the only math course where he actually needed to read the textbook was an abstract algebra class (title was something like groups, rings and fields). It turned out that he didn’t need to go to class or read the book for his real analysis class (which I remember as being pretty hard), which pissed his professor off. The math helped him a lot in getting into and doing well in Computational and Mathematical Engineering grad school. It wasn’t his primary area of focus as an undergrad, but has been very beneficial to him per the lawyer’s advice to his kids.
I’d have to agree with @shawbridge . Ordinarykid2 finished a math major, mostly because, by the time she figured out was real math was, she was just a few credits shy and wanted to finish. Most of what hs math covers, even the accelerated classes, is computational. Ok2 was good at that, and realized what she liked was applied math, which fit right in with her second major (CS). Real math, the proof-based stuff…eh, very different animal.
And since we’re talking about regretted majors, she wishes she’d taken a the double majors in CS and Studio Art, not mathematics!
A. Math 214 is Applied Linear Algebra (Median Grade =- B)
B. Math 217 is Linear Algebra (Median Grade = B+)
Math 217 is for math majors and is proof-based. Math 214 is for engineering students incorporates group projects with computer programming. Both are extremely difficult, but quite different.
I assume you are referring to Berkeley and the listed Berkeley grade distribution. t Berkeley offers several physics sequences. It’s my understanding 8A is primarily for bio/pre-med and uses little calculus (according to student reports). 7a targets engineering majors and uses more calculus. And 5A targets physics majors or others looking for a more rigorous/theoretical approach and is more math heavy than both 7A and 8A. The grade distributions on Berkeleytime for the first class in the sequence are as follows. I am excluding students who took the class Pass/No Pass, which I did not do last time. In both of the more popular classes (not physics majors), almost exactly 30% received an A+A/A- grade. This may relate to many professors structuring a curve such that ~30% of the class receives an A+/A/A- grade.
Berkeley Intro Physics Grade Distribution
5A (Targets physics majors): 38% A+/A/A-, Median Grade = B+
7A (Targets engineering majors): 29% A+/A/A-, Median Grade = B
8A (Targets pre-med students): 29% A+/A/A-, Median Grade = B
The Berkeley grades above seems harsh compared to many selective privates. For example, the corresponding courses at Stanford show the following distribution. Again the more rigorous class with a higher concentration of students doing A quality work has a higher grade distribution, but all 3 are substantially higher than Berkeley. It suggests many Stanford professors may be using a 50% A+/A/A- type curve. Being among the upper half of Stanford students isn’t trivial, even with many of the physics majors and other top physics students removed from the sample since they choose 61-63
Stanford Intro Physics Grade Distribution (Old)
61 (Targets physics majors): 67% A+/A/A-, Median Grade = A/A-
41 (Targets engineering majors): 46% A+/A/A-, Median Grade = B+
21 (Targets pre-med students): 48% A+/A/A-, Median Grade = A-/B+
Stanford also used to offer a 4th intro physics sequence called “Physics for Poets” that hardly used math at all and probably targeted students looking to fulfill a general graduation distribution requirement about taking a STEMish class. The class became something of a joke, which probably relates to why it was removed.
More to the point of the thread, I think a lot of the STEM attrition rate at these colleges relates to how students react to getting a B/B+ type grade, rather than the grades themselves or ability. If a student is used to getting all A’s in HS, getting a B in college can be a traumatic experience. In my freshman dorm at Stanford, they had psych counselors come by the dorm after first midterm as preventative measure because it was common for students to struggle with getting their first B’s. Some students immediately choose to drop out of their planned STEM major at the first sign of freshman year B’s, even though some B’s are generally fine for engineering/CS. Others choose to persists and often improve their grades after they get used to the more rigorous course level than offered at their HS. The Duke study found that two of the most statistically significant predictive factors for dropping out of a planned STEM major after controls were quality of HS course curriculum and harshness of grading within specific Duke classes, rather than HS GPA or SAT scores.