<p>
Apparently not always. I’m not sure where the OPs son goes in this thread, but overachiever’s mom’s son is having similar problems,and he appears to be at a top 10 school.</p>
<p>My S is at Stanford. I received about 5 PMs over the past few days-- without compromising their identities- 4 guys, one young woman. Two at Cornell, another from Stanford, 1 Carnegie and 1 from Maryland. Clearly, there lots of people who have very bright students who didn’t do too well-- many Cs and Ds…only the OP here has Fs . No one PM’d me with Fs-- but some people don’t air their “dirty laundry” even in an anonymous environment.</p>
<p>Could be a lot of factors, not going to class and not studying are usually big ones…I also had some of that in my college career, also involved personal issues as well.</p>
<p>One question I have, what was the child like when they went to high school? Were they high achieving there? One of big problems out there, especially at difficult or top schools, is that they often get high achieving students who for whatever reasons, did well in high school and were able to do so without working hard (I have had people tell me that a kid who is truly gifted is a gift, but in many ways it isn’t , because things often come too easily, and few schools make an effort to challenge gifted kids or make sure they actually have to work for grades. In many ways, it is easier to be bright but have to work through lower schools, the pattern is set).</p>
<p>It is possible that given the relatively slow pace of high school classes as compared to college (what takes a year in HS is generally a semester at college), even with the most difficult classes, that a kid could get through without really having to work, then they hit college and find suddenly what once worked didn’t…and they don’t put in the study time and the work, thinking they can 'drift their way through, and have a rude awakening. </p>
<p>I think your son does know, and quite honestly, if he doesn’t, or won’t admit it, the same thing is likely to happen again. He needs to figure this out, and quite honestly, as his parent you have the right to find that answer before committing to anything. I would be a lot less concerned about the money wasted, then in the kid facing the same situation again and really starting to believe he isn’t capable.</p>
<p>Couple of ideas to throw out there on a brainstorming basis:</p>
<p>1)You may want to see if there are any study skills workshops available, either through the school or outside programs.One of the big factors of studying isn’t just time, it is learning to do it right, in a way that works for the student.Some kids sit there and read and reread stuff and don’t retain it, or are not able to use it, others do outlines then find out they don’t work for them. Especially with kids who got through school easily, this is a biggie.</p>
<p>2)Another thought might be to find some sort of short term counseling for him, to help him figure out why he did badly if he really doesn’t seem to know. Some kids self destruct for a number of reasons, maybe talking to someone would help him figure that out. (One guy I knew hit college, despite being bloody brilliant, and was trashing even crap courses he could do in his sleep; he didn’t drink, party, do video games or the like, went to class, and still did badly…he figured out with some help that his parents had always pushed him into being ‘poindexter’, his whole world was classes and math competitions and the like, had literally no social life, and resented what they did unconsciously…when he was able to figure that out, and was able to finally tell his parents to back off (he credited the family rabbi for really helping, said the rabbi was the kind of guy you could see with Torah in one hand and a sword in the other <em>lol</em>). Guy ended up with a brilliant college career, I think he became PHd in physics like at 24 or something…). </p>
<p>3)If he is in engineering or something like that, could he be in the wrong field? Sometimes kids go into something because they think it is the right thing to do, or parents do, and find it isn’t them…maybe he needs to look at the courses he got bad grades in, and figure out if it simply is something he doesn’t want to do…</p>
<p>Look, I was apparently wrong about the CC courses. About thirty years ago I did my undergrad at CMU, and they would not have accepted any CC courses as substitutes for math/engineering/science. (They did give credit for 5’s from APs in Science/Math). </p>
<p>The freshman engineering and science courses were the essence of the first year weedout for those majors. As a freshman, I took three specific technical courses in my major, plus the standard math/chem/physics and humanities. None of those courses would have transferred from a CC, except perhaps the humanities. Even those would have been questionable, since the English course was a level above freshman writing (they placed students based on test scores).</p>
<p>Maybe things are different now (but hopefully not too different at the stronger engineering/science programs). CMU wasn’t a place where you take a few years before entering serious courses in your major; you jump right in. Perhaps that’s affecting my viewpoint.</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>As several others have already noted, STEM intro courses often function as “weed-out” courses, whether by design or not, to ensure only the most highly prepared and motivated students continue as majors. </p>
<p>I experienced this firsthand when I took 2 intro CS programming classes for majors to fulfill part of my science requirements. Although I passed, around 30-50% failed. Heard similar stories from most high school classmates who mentioned even higher flunkout figures in their intro STEM courses. </p>
<p>One post-college bio-major roommate I knew who graduated from Tufts said around 60% flunked the year-long intro-bio sequence for aspiring bio-majors/pre-meds.</p>
<p>We have started to have some conversations about all of this. I agree that just sending him back to school is a recipe for disaster. He knows he studied far less than he should have-10hours/week instead of 20 or 30 hours. He knows now that studying in his room won’t work-too many distractions. He swears he went to classes. He was not a great student in HS and I guess that he should have taken an easier workload to start with. The problems though aren’t about content but that he procrastinates, finds other things to do, then tries to cram it all in at the last minute.
He didn’t take AP classes but they were higher level classes. He really needs to retake these classes at his university so that he can get rid of the F’s. He will be taking Comm. College classes over the summer to catch up. I believe the math courses and sciences will transfer. If he works like a dog the next couple of years he can catch up.
I told him today that just saying he didn’t know what happened is a cop out and he needs to come up with something. He needs to have concrete solutions not just I’ll do better.</p>
<p>I’d also like to thank ucsd<em>ucla</em>dad for his great description of the CS/CE curriculum. His posts dovetail completely with my own experience. Those CS courses are hard and time-consuming, plain and simple. The 25 hours of homework per wk per programming class sounds quite accurate, and the all-nighters are a given. When a student signs up for that curriculum, he’s signing up for a much heavier load than than most of the surrounding students. It’s tough. I remember how tiresome the routine became, especially when the crush of work came down in the springtime - walking off for another all-nighter, while the humanities students played guitars and threw frisbees on the lawn. To this day, I still dislike the spring because of that strong image.</p>
<p>Now I’m thinking back to my freshman year. It was a blast, but it didn’t take long for me to realize that it wouldn’t be possible for me to get the work done with all my friends around; too much fun. So I developed the strategy of occasionally heading off to isolated areas for a few days/nights of marathon study sessions, sometimes blowing off all classes for days, then dropping back into the ongoing “lord of the flies” chaos (which I heartily enjoyed).</p>
<p>That strategy served me well throughout my undergrad years. When I graduated, I had quite a few friends among the middle-of-the-night janitorial staff. Many of my freshman year comrades never made it out.</p>
<p>[Edit to add:] Let me give a shout out to Ike, 3rd floor Baker Hall custodian, Psychology area, 1979-81 - you were always a friendly face in the middle of the night as I wrapped things up in my final terms at CMU. I hope you and your niece are doing well!</p>
<p>
I suppose I should be offended at the implication that the education I received was so vastly inferior, but I understand your point of view. You went to a top notch place. We were told not to bother trying to transfer there, as cc transfers were not taken seriously by CMU. Whether I could have made the grade had they let me in we’ll never know. In truth, I don’t think it would have been a good fit for me personality wise.</p>
<p>30 years ago you could transfer to Cal or Stanford with courses that count from a CC. I don’t know about “three specific technical courses” but certainly “standard math/chem/physics and humanities” are accepted. And they are accepted today as well.</p>
<p>And I’d put Stanford or Cal CS/CE majors ahead of those similar majors at CMU, especially today.</p>
<p>To the op, nothing wrong with having your son take it slower, although it may cost a few more bucks if he goes 5 or even 6 years. He’s got a lot of life ahead, do what’s best for him in the long run.</p>
<p>
On the a basis of what exactly?</p>
<p>For what it’s worth I consider Cal, Stanford and MIT pretty much equals in CS.</p>
<p>sylvan - Sorry, I certainly don’t mean to offend anyone, just speaking from my own experience. Where I came from, CC courses were mostly remedial HS, and the general student body wouldn’t have had the ability to do university level math/science. In this thread, I’ve learned that there are vast differences among CCs. But still, there’s likely to be some gap, and good quality engineering programs insist on their standards for transfer. Also, CMU isn’t a fit for anyone personality-wise!</p>
<p>But we’re all over the board here! Amusingly, in this same thread, we’ve got some folks saying “take the CC courses”, and others arguing that the same sci/eng programs shouldn’t be accepting incoming AP 5’s in math or the sciences. In my experience, those kids that came in with 5’s in Calc, Physics and Chem were smoking through the next-level classes, and tutoring all their freshman friends. Just saying :)</p>
<p>pacheight (that’s PAC-8, as in Pacific-8, right?) - I guess I can understand your geographical argument that Berkeley and Stanford are much better than CMU, Cornell, MIT :).</p>
<p>
Really? What vast experience do you have with this? I’m really curious where you encountered all these kids with “5s” smoking through say, upper division Mechanics or E&M in any respectable Physics program. Granted, some kids with high AP scores are very advanced. But as I stated, the AP test certainly doesn’t tell you that. I suspect that for these young geniuses the AP exams were trivial.</p>
<p>Have you actually looked at the material on the AP exams and the questions they ask? Pull them up on the collegeboard website. Are you aware that on some exams around 60% or even less will earn you a 5.</p>
<p>Calc AB is like half of a calculus course. Calc BC is reasonable, but IMO no way equivalent to a rigorous College Calc course. I don’t think there are even proofs on the test. Maybe in the free response, but you can score very highly just by acing the MC.</p>
<p>And IMO Physics B is missing half the stuff you learn in Freshman physics. I don’t even think it includes Maxwell’s equations for crying out loud. I’m not sure B even includes much Calculus.</p>
<p>cmu is carnegie mellon right?</p>
<p>I don’t know about “much” better but ya better. higher scoring students, more accomplished profs, better resources, and way better industry connections in the valley. so yes, better!</p>
<p>and here’s a volatile one, more creative environments, especially at Stanford, less so at crowded Cal.</p>
<p>I never mentioned MIT or Cornell. MIT is similar to Stanford but Cornell please, you know ivy league is a sports league it doesn’t mean Cornell is equal to Harvard or Yale.</p>
<p>I’m not sure how to link another thread but if you lookin the parents forum under “is this school just too hard for him” you will see lots of great advice (as a matter of fact I’ll bump it to the top). My S1 is in an ivy engineering school and was floored by how hard the work has been. One thing we can all breathe a sigh of relief over is that he is finally done with all calculus based math and moved on to discrete (discreet?) math. For whatever reason calculus was just a bear for him ( despite a 5 on AP BC calc). He loves CS but understands that it is going to be a long hard road through school. On the positive side, he has had lots of opportunities for internships (paid) so despite the less than stellar grades he must be learning something! PM me if you want more specifics but the aforementioned thread has lots of dirty details!</p>
<p>[AP:</a> Physics B](<a href=“College Board - SAT, AP, College Search and Admission Tools”>AP Physics C: Mechanics – AP Students | College Board)</p>
<p>Here’s the content in Calc B and C. 5s on both exams might be a reasonable facsimile of a Freshman Physics course, but I believe there may still be some gaps vis a vis the use of calculus in some topics. And I’m only talking content, not the difficulty of the exams.</p>
<p>I know lots of kids with 5s who struggled through the Freshman classes, let alone the upper division classes. All “fivers” are not created equal - it’s a necessary but not necessarily sufficient qualification for skipping Freshman courses.</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>And just as interestingly, I and dozens of high school classmates at LACs and elite universities also encountered students who never took any AP courses and yet, excelled in college, even those in STEM fields. </p>
<p>What I later found out from dozens of college classmates and friends who teach K-12 all over the US in suburban public and private schools is that even among “good schools”, what passes for an AP course at one school may not meet the minimal standards for a “regular” high school course at another.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>bovertine - </p>
<p>Well, I wouldn’t call it “vast experience” (by the way, your tone suggests that I somehow angered you - not sure how, but sorry if so).</p>
<p>I’m basing the AP comment on my own undergrad experience, specifically for AP Physics, AP Chem, BC Calc, AP English - the core APs that were popular back then. My experience is with a bunch of Sci/Eng friends that I met as a freshman (some from my own public HS, but many others not). The kids who tested out of these classes were doing fine with all their classes, and they were very popular tutors in the freshmen dorm. </p>
<p>My only AP (a BC Calc 5) let me start with Calc III, which was easier than HS. In the dorms, it was obvious that my public HS Calc was stronger than the university’s year one. The extra credits came in handy - first for flexibility, and later in combination with some other extra courses, permitting a part-time senior year, thereby saving a boatload of sorely needed money for my happy dad. I wish that I hadn’t been such a slacker in HS; I should have taken AP Physics as well (although I would have missed a great professor, money is money).</p>
<p>I think you need to honestly assess your high school, and determine whether the courses are real. At my HS, those AP courses were seriously real. Hopefully my HS kid will do a lot more AP work than his lazy dad, and I’ll certainly be looking for schools that honor APs (at least those that I consider to be real). On these boards, there are stories about kids “pre-taking” classes in the summer, so as to score A’s when they retake them in school. That seems just as silly as having kids retake college coursework that they’ve already mastered. </p>
<p>Anyway, that’s the way it was. Maybe you had a different experience, but it certainly doesn’t invalidate my experience.</p>
<p>pach8 - MIT, Stanford, CMU, and UCB (in no particular order) are widely considered to be the top CS departments. In my book, they are equivalents, albeit with different flavors. Thirty years ago, the short list was MIT, Stanford, and CMU (again, no order), followed closely by Cornell. Back then, UCB was a top 20; now it’s among the very best.</p>
<p>I included Cornell, which is very strong, only for the east coast/west coast joke (your “proof by geography”). You can fill in a “better” west coast school to beat them. :)</p>
<p>By the way, now that you know what “CMU” stands for, look around the valley a bit more. You’ll see CMU everywhere.</p>
<p>are we talking about the same cmu? the one ranked 23rd between USC and Cal by USnews? </p>
<p>cmu is a good/respected school but it’s not in the same league as a Stanford or MIT. It’s in a good league but lower league than hypsm</p>
<p>as far as thinkers and execs in the valley I’ll stick with Stanford. cisco=stanford, Apples #2 guy = Stanford. Google = lots and lots of Stanford grads. many recruited while still students at Stanford, that’s pretty amazing biz relations for an undergrad program.</p>
<p>CMU? That’s Central Michigan, right? </p>
<p>Since you mentioned USNews, check out their rankings for graduate CS: [Rankings</a> - Computer Science - Graduate Schools - Education - US News](<a href=“http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-computer-science-schools/rankings]Rankings”>http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-computer-science-schools/rankings)
and for undergraduate “computer engineering”: [Undergraduate</a> Engineering Specialties: Computer - Best Colleges - Education - US News](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/spec-doct-computer]Undergraduate”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/spec-doct-computer)</p>
<p>Oh look, UIUC snuck in there ahead of Berkeley in the undergrad rankings - mon dieu, crise cardiaque! If you haven’t heard of UIUC, they’ve been a top-notch program for a long time.</p>
<p>Graduate CS:
1 Carnegie Mellon University
1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
1 Stanford University
1 University of California–Berkeley
5 Cornell University
5 University of Illinois–Urbana-Champaign
7 University of Washington
8 Princeton University
8 University of Texas–Austin
10 Georgia Institute of Technology
11 California Institute of Technology
11 University of Wisconsin–Madison
13 University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
14 University of California–Los Angeles
14 University of California–San Diego
14 University of Maryland–College Park
17 Columbia University
17 Harvard University
17 University of Pennsylvania
20 Brown University
20 Purdue University–West Lafayette
20 Rice University
20 University of Massachusetts–Amherst
20 University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill
20 University of Southern California</p>
<p>Undergraduate “Computer Engineering” (they only list top 10 for free):
1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
2 Carnegie Mellon University
3 Stanford University
3 University of Illinois–Urbana-Champaign
5 University of California–Berkeley
6 Georgia Institute of Technology
7 University of Texas–Austin
8 University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
9 California Institute of Technology
10 Cornell University</p>
<p>OK, let’s stop hijacking this poor person’s thread.</p>