<p>
Or apocrypha. ;)</p>
<p>
I’m not sure exactly what you thought was unfair. Are you saying the kid met all the requirements for the program but wan’t admitted? Or that he should have been admitted because of persecution under Pol Pot? I assume your colleague didn’t think the decision was unfair, and that’s the reason most things we might think are unfair aren’t resolved simply - there is a dispute about what is fair and what isn’t. Your colleague apparently didn’t agree with you, and there is no celestial Alex Trebek to come down and say what the corect answer is. </p>
<p>Obviously, most people would sy it was unfair that some people suffer under tyrants, and others are born into royalty. But I bet you could even find disagreement on that.</p>
<p>I think each of us has some reasonable personality “differences” that allow us to cling to our stands, view issues thru our own lenses, justify, proclaim, etc. Not bad. Sometimes goes with a sort of high intelligence. Fine
But sometimes we forget it takes more than subject mastery or brilliance or grand potential, to amount to something. Life isn’t all about who discovers some new equation or wins a math contest or anything, if we can’t somehow reach others or affect them. The best scorer on a test, Bel, is just the best scorer, to start.</p>
<p>QM - from what I heard (I think Mollie mentioned that) MITChris is taking a break from MIT and is currently in grad school.</p>
<p>Apparent a grad of UMass</p>
<p>Hopefully not digressing too much (if that’s possible on this thread). But I noticed for the MS programs at Cal State Us, the minimum requirement for entrance is usually based on the GPA in the last 60 or so units in the major. That may be fairer for recent immigrants, but I don’t think that’s the reason they set the bar there. I think the reason is that the CSUs, which don’t really offer PhDs, prep people for vocations rather than academia. THey’ve probably found that success in those programs is related more to GPA in the UD major courses than LD gen ed. It may end up seeming more “fair”, but I don’t think that’s the reason for the policy.</p>
<p>Apparent a grad of UMass.
Where are you reading current comments from him?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>lookingforward, I agree with this to a certain extent. I don’t mean to sound grandiose, but what if these kids who win math contests go on to make great discoveries which change the world? So the best scorer on a contest, at face value, may not mean anything, but it could suggest that that kid has great potential which may lead to great success. And that success could “reach out and affect others”. I think that Mark Zuckerberg is a great example of this. If I recall correctly, he participated in math and cs competitions. And look at how he has changed the world.</p>
<p>
At least in this case we are debating matters of opinion.
Have you ever participated on a forum where people debate factual things? For example, whether a plane will takeoff from a treadmill, or the so-called “Monty Hall” problem. THose things have actual correct answers and people will still hold incorrrect positions to their dying day even when I am certain they know they are wrong. I’m stubborn but I often change my mind when proven wrong or given a convincing argument. I’ve done so on this website frequently. And not only because I’m wrong so often.</p>
<p>But if you claim to be wrong so often, you could be wrong about being wrong too. We might need some help from the math team to demonstrate that two wrongs amount to one right. </p>
<p>What door do you take?</p>
<p>“ETA: quantitative money management firms find the AMC meaningful, which is why Jane Street and DE Shaw sponsor it, and why they and a few others sponsor classes at the Art of Problem Solving.”</p>
<p>Goody for Jane Street. Quantitative money management firms wouldn’t have jobs / businesses if it weren’t for the people who have the creativity and vision to invent, produce and market actual things that people want to buy. Which requires insight into the human condition, which can’t always be measured by SAT scores.</p>
<p>“I find them relevant because I think that colleges use these results to tout their math programs and by extension, it adds to their overall reputation.”</p>
<p>It’s like you’re completely unaware of whole fields of study that aren’t math. Good lord, I was a freakin’ math major and we didn’t take ourselves as seriously as you all take the subject.</p>
<p>"don’t mean to sound grandiose, but what if these kids who win math contests go on to make great discoveries which change the world? So the best scorer on a contest, at face value, may not mean anything, but it could suggest that that kid has great potential which may lead to great success. "</p>
<p>What, like the kid who came in at 10 or 100 in these contests couldn’t? Anyway, the proof is in the pudding. Are these kids changing the world, or toiling away in self-referential academia talking to one another and nobody else?</p>
<p>@bogibogi you wrote: “I find them relevant because I think that colleges use these results to tout their math programs and by extension, it adds to their overall reputation.”</p>
<p>It is a bit more than that. Top paying employers have been known to ask math people what their Putnam score was when interviewing for summer jobs and others ask to see what the progression of Putnam scores were during your college years.</p>
<p>@pizzagirl: "Are these kids changing the world, or toiling away in self-referential academia talking to one another and nobody else? "</p>
<p>I don’t know what you are trying to say.</p>
<ol>
<li> Why is this any different than the philosophy, art, english, germanic studies major who is toiling away in academia?<br></li>
<li> Why is the bar now that people have to focus on changing the world via academics? A great parent may change the world more than a great poet.</li>
</ol>
<p>
</p>
<p>Interesting. I was asked my SAT scores by a high-paying employer, but apparently I was never interviewed by members of the Inner Circle. My eldest son does well on the AMC 8 while still in elementary school, so there may be hope for him.</p>
<p>
Belyavsky, I don’t have a problem with standardized tests if they produce scores that are valid for their use. As an extreme example, scores from a test of English grammar shouldn’t be used to evaluate reading comprehension, even though the abilities are correlated. Depending on the job, experts could establish competencies that are needed for the job and then develop or find tests that measure mastery of these competencies. In the example of mathematics majors, it will depend on the track students choose after earning their BA. Some will work in finance after graduation, some will go to grad school in a related field, not necessarily pure math. They will have to take GRE. For the lack of a better measure, GRE is standardized at least and thus provides a baseline. </p>
<p>Bogibogi, Putnam is good at showing an ability to solve problems with known solutions within given several hours. I can agree that for a lot of fields it maybe a good indicator of problem solving skills, especially when problems are relatively small. Real mathematicians may spend years on problems that haven’t been solved yet. This skill can’t be measured by Putnam.</p>
<p>PizzaGirl, I’m sorry discussions of tests and contests don’t entertain you. I hope you find interesting topics on this forum if you keep coming back.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>On the issue of relevance, the real question should be about “relevance to WHAT.” </p>
<p>While it is not hard to see why a competition such as the Putnam is relevant and important to the schools as it offers them bragging rights, kudoes, and the recognition from a small and elite group, the relevance to the themes USUALLY discussed here are less apparent. In terms of admissions to colleges, the relevance of a Putnam competition is of the size of a drop in an ocean, as the number of potential fellows is by design incredibly small. Not to mention that the most probable successful participants in such competition are not necessarily the ones who lose much sleep about “getting in” prestigious school that fits them well. </p>
<p>In the end, it is a matter of personal interest. For an incredibly small group, the level of personal interest is stratospheric. For our Joe SixPacks, it is totally irrelevant. For the people who toss their hats in the 300,000 strong competition at the Ivies Plus, it is still mostly irrelevant. Not that it is much different ftom other highly specialized activities in performing arts and athletics. Our larger universe comprises plenty of microcosms that are not always relavant to their neighbors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yolochka, at the risk of getting dangerously close to an ad hominem, allow me to --once again-- share that your conversational style is far from endearing when you cling to make personal remarks. Many of us have been here a long time, and most of us have been on the “other side” of conversations as we do not always agree or find consensus. </p>
<p>While we might not agree with one another, the opposing views have helped us look at the other side of the coin. I have often said that I have learned more from people with whom I find it hard to agree than from people who share my well arrested views. </p>
<p>This is not an exclusive club. Everyone who can create an account --or more as it is often the case-- can contribute. Over time, people have come to accept that recent members approach our discussions differently. While you are entitled to call out people on remarks they made, I think that repeatedly doing so, and especially with people who have made thousands of posts with plenty of nuances, is getting old. </p>
<p>To be clear, I found the last sentence quoted above to be entirely misplaced and uncalled for. Unless, you wanted to attract our attention to the original post in this thread by being funny, offensive, and annoying in one swoop of the keyboard. </p>
<p>Please drop it!</p>
<p>Back to the original discussion, if I may. I wish more hiring managers and headhunters would come on here and state which colleges and universities they consider “really good schools” and for which fields and which geographic areas.</p>
<p>Conversation with DS the other day:</p>
<p>Me: So, how’s the job search going?
S: Not so great.
Me: Well, at least you’re getting interviews! Every time I talk to you, you’ve just had another one.
S: True. It think it’s because of my college. Practically every headhunter and interviewer starts the conversation with “Ivy X–that’s a really good school!”</p>
<p>Obviously, once S gets the interview, he has to still have the goods to land the job, and that’s a nod to the other side of this debate. However, he believes his school affiliation is helping him get in the door. He could be wrong–the comment about his alma mater could just be a standard opening that’s no more meaningful than “Nice day today!” Do we ever really know? We don’t, but this illustrates how a person’s experience gives rise to an opinion about the importance of a college’s prestige. I can’t prove S is correct, but I can’t prove he isn’t either.</p>