<p>[The</a> double-major and SB enrollment statistics aren’t tremendously encouraging](<a href=“Statistics & Reports | MIT Registrar”>Statistics & Reports | MIT Registrar), but I’d imagine that it’s still theoretically possible if you’re dead-set on it. </p>
<p>And I say that as someone looking at a slightly less harsh double-major. ;P</p>
<p>downside: Mollie no longer attends MIT.</p>
<p>upside: She sometimes visits.</p>
<p>
The first statement doesn’t seem so bad. The latter one does. Aren’t most courseloads 48 units, as stated [url=<a href=“http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/life/workplay_balance_at_mit/index.shtml]here[/url”>Clubs & activities | MIT Admissions]here[/url</a>]? So if this particular class is 24 units, doesn’t that make one’s courseload 60 units? Ouch. And add the extra uncounted for hours you stated…
I’m kind of wondering something. If a college [one different from MIT] has a similar/higher number of ‘units’ per week than MIT for a certain major - then that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s more difficult, does it?</p>
<p>Jimmy797 - no. UMich is in my figurative back yard and they’re on a completely different system, where most classes are 3 or 4 credits - doesn’t mean MIT is 3 to 4 times harder. I get really confused trying to figure out exactly how much my friends are doing because I’m so used to thinking of things in 12 units.</p>
<p>Three MIT units equal 1 semester hour at most other schools.</p>
<p>Jimmy - From what I’ve seen, people generally only take 2 classes in addition to Unified. Unified is actually 4 classes, 2 per term of sophomore year, but it’s all referred to as Unified :D</p>
<p>Also, what kryptonsa36 said about units. Though I found 48 units at MIT to be harder than 16 units at CSULA, but that doesn’t have to do with the way we calculate units :P</p>
<p>
I must be missing something. How could 48 units at MIT not be more difficult than 16 units at another college?</p>
<p>Wait, isn’t the point here that MIT requires 3x as much work as the next college? Or am I still missing something?</p>
<p>
No. Yes, you are missing something; see below.</p>
<p>
The point is that 48 units at MIT is technically equivalent to 16 credits elsewhere; they both equate to taking four classes, so if you were to transfer out of MIT, you would receive only 16 credits at the new university for your 48-unit work at MIT. Therefore, a 12-unit class at MIT should have similar (predicted) time requirements and amount of work assigned as a 4-credit class at some other school. It’s the rigor of the course content that determines whether the 12-unit MIT course or the 4-credit other-school course is actually more difficult though.</p>
<p>^Ah, thanks. I was thrown off by the ‘16 units’ thing.
So 1 class at MIT is 12 units, and elsewhere it’s 4 credits. And 3 MIT units is basically 1 credit.
Does MIT use credits at all? Or is it solely unit-based?
And seeing as you said the rigor of the course content is what determines difficulty - If MIT courses are more rigorous (which I’m sure they are) then they require more work than elsewhere. So 4 credits at some other university doesn’t necessarily [and wouldn’t usually] translate to 12 hours of work there.
Correct me if I’m wrong here :)</p>
<p>^ Credits, units, these are basically arbitrary. At MIT, how many units something is is approximately how many hours per week you’ll need to spend on the class (including study time).* At other schools, I believe they do units by how many hours you spend in class per week. But all this depends on how the school wants to set up their system, and MIT doesn’t follow the typical system.</p>
<p>I was saying that CSULA classes seem much easier than MIT classes, despite technically having the same “load” (conversion being 16*3=48).</p>
<ul>
<li>The approximations can be blatant lies. See Unified.</li>
</ul>
<ol>
<li><p>Not to rain on this party, but how many threads have we had exactly on “what is the downside of going to MIT?” in recent weeks? lol</p></li>
<li><p>Hey, hey, hey - at least for the Class of 2011 (which hasn’t graduated yet), we can still do the 2nd SB - so Mollie, you can’t afford to be all uppity and stuff yet. ; )</p></li>
<li><p>Yeah, so every other school’s credits = MIT credits / 3. Also, every other school’s GPA = MIT GPA - 1. I think MIT just wants its students to feel special and be less stressed out =D</p></li>
</ol>
<p>(it might be kind of sad, but I practically never think in the 5.0 GPA syste anymore - I usually just -1 to make it easier for my non-MIT friends to understand =p)</p>
<p>^ instead of -1, shouldn’t you multiply by 4/5 instead? That way it scales proportionally.</p>
<p>It doesn’t scale proportionally: except for an “F” grade, the numerical “value” of any letter grade is simply 1 higher at MIT. So a 4.0 at MIT is a 3.0 elsewhere. <a href=“http://web.mit.edu/registrar/gpacalc.html[/url]”>http://web.mit.edu/registrar/gpacalc.html</a></p>
<p>
Really? It still takes me a while for me to register that someone not from MIT with a 4.0 is not a mediocre student. :P</p>
<p>^But a person from MIT with a 4.0 is mediocre? 
[I’m assuming the GPA is out of /5.0]</p>
<p>A 4.0 at MIT is below-average.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think the actual wording is for those who entered in fall 2007… hence, there may be some stragglers :D</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Mediocre at MIT, but I will note that it’s probably not mediocre in the greater context of the world :D</p>