<p>I've looked at the Aero/Asto curriculum at GA tech, Michigan and Purdue and they pretty much are all the same in terms of what people take and when they take it. The 1st year seems similar to what MIT people take albeit the intensity is surely different. But the sophomore year looks crazy at MT. They cover Aerodynamics, structures and Propulsion all by the end of that year in a year long course called "Unified Engineering". At the other schools they don't start Aerodynamics or structures til the 3rd year and propulsion isn't even covered til the senior year!!!!!!!!!!! This certainly amazes me and lays to rest any claims that these schools are more or less equal. MIT is clearly much more intense from what I see. Can anybody else comment on Aero/Astro at MIT. I'm definitely applying to MIT now. BTW, check out my other post if you want to see my stats and comment on whether u think I'm worthy of attending such a fine school.</p>
<p>Hahahahaha, Unified.</p>
<p>My boyfriend is course 16 (aero/astro), and he took Unified last year. It's, um, quite the class... really hard, but by the end, students are extremely well-trained. You're very right that it's extremely intense... Unified is a 24-unit class, which should mean that it takes about 24 hours a week (class + lab + homework). There were many weeks last year, however, that it took much more time than that for my boyfriend and his friends.</p>
<p>The upside to Unified, since all sophomore aero/astro majors take it, is that it fosters a very strong sense of cameraderie and collaboration among the students majoring in course 16. The downside, of course, is that it's very hard. But hey, if it weren't hard, it wouldn't be rocket science, right? :)</p>
<p>I'd be happy to answer any other questions you have about course 16, or else direct them at my boyfriend.</p>
<p>You know a class is hard when people don't refer to it by its course number. :P</p>
<p>Thanks for your reply molliebatmit . I'm curious considering there are so many competent people at MIT how they "curve" if they curve classes at all. I have heard that at most Univ. the avgs. on engineering exams are in the 60's and they curve at a B-. One standard deviation above is an A- and one standard deviation below is a C-. What are the averages like at MIT and do they curve similiarly? One insane student told me that at MIT, the avgs. are usually in the mid 90's and if you get below a 95 u've got a C. Is this true? Thanks a lot.</p>
<p>Ahhh, Unifried and Joe B. Even though I am not course 16, I have heard much of these :p</p>
<p>Well, averages at MIT are rarely if ever in the mid-90s. I mean, kids here are smart, but the professors expect more out of us, too! I would expect most engineering test averages to be in the 60s-70s, but that depends on the department, the class, and the professor. (For instance, a lot of chem E tests have averages in the 40s.)</p>
<p>Generally, curved classes have the average set to a B or B-, the way you have described. Still, if the average on a test did happen, by some miracle, to be 95 or something, more people would get A's. I mean, MIT professors are challenging, not evil.</p>
<p>So the answer to your question: they curve classes by making the tests very difficult! :)</p>
<p>Incidentally, Unified is one of the relatively few classes that doesn't curve at all. Prior to each test, the professors set the average grade for the test -- as mit2007mit said, they call this hypothetical average student "Joe B.", and he always gets a B. Sometimes Joe B. "gets" an 80, sometimes he "gets" a 60... I think most of the time he gets a 70. This system, of course, relies on the professors being able to gauge how well students will do before students take tests... it doesn't always work, in which case lots of people fail the test. But there are many tests in each Unified semester (~11, I think), so if (when) a student fails one test, he/she has many opportunities to catch up. There is also a substantial homework component (usually two problem sets and a lab per week), so final grades aren't just based on tests.</p>
<p>this post scares me =[</p>
<p>Which part is scary? The low test averages, or the Unified procedures in particular?</p>
<p>Keep in mind that it doesn't matter whether class average is high or low, since most classes curve. If class average is an 80 vs. a 40, people at class average are still going to get approximately a B-. And MIT doesn't give plus/minus modifiers, so a B- is the same as a B on your transcript. So really, what does it matter?</p>
<p>Wait... the modifiers don't show up on the transcript? lol! Why did I not know this? :p</p>
<p>Hey, im a freshman now, and I got some questions on how grades work (for when im on grades next semester)? Do you have to be a standard dev above on every test to get an A? Is the bare minimum B the average? Do devs tend to level out (for example, say the dev is 20 on one test, and 10 on the other, would the dev for the average combined score be less than 15?)</p>
<p>How are people able to manage triple majors?
Like Alex Wissner-Gross (right person?)?</p>
<p>Overall grades for the semester really depend on the professor and the class. In most of my classes, the profs only give approximate letter grades for individual tests, then determine the actual cutoffs at the end of the term by looking at the overall distribution -- apparently overall grades frequently fall into easily distinguishable peaks, and one peak is labeled "A", etc. You definitely don't have to be a standard dev above on every test to get an A.</p>
<p>But perhaps I am a bad person to be asking this... I definitely get more Bs than As! :)</p>
<p>And sr6622 -- triple-majors aren't allowed anymore, because... well, actually I don't really know why not. Probably just because they required an obscene amount of work? According to The Tech, triple-majors haven't been allowed since [url=<a href="http://www-tech.mit.edu/V119/N67/67academic.67n.html%5D2000%5B/url">http://www-tech.mit.edu/V119/N67/67academic.67n.html]2000[/url</a>], so the most you can get as an MIT undergrad is two bachelors degrees and two minors.</p>
<p>(1000th post!)</p>
<p>LOL, yeah triple majors are no more.</p>
<p>Honestly, I don't know how people ever did it. Those people are a whole new level of smart :p</p>
<p>Oh, and for the Freshman, don't worry about grades yet! lol. That's the only semester you really don't have to worry about it. (Only caveat is some premeds).</p>
<p>Thanks guys! Not worrying too much about grades... just still haven't gotten over the shock of not being "the man" anymore. No matter how much you tell yourself that everyone is as smart or smarter, it doesn't really sink in until you get here.</p>
<p>No triple majors! That's a shock. I always thought it would be enriching to get three bachelors degrees. So, what if you complete the course requirements for 3 majors; they just won't award a third bachelors degree?</p>
<p>Lol, theoretically I think that would be the case.</p>
<p>However I maintain that only a very small few would run into this situation :p</p>
<p>I originally came in wanting to double major. Let's just say I no longer have that ambition :p. I think they had some statistics on this. Some amazingly high percentage of incoming freshman each year want to double major, and only a fraction actually do.</p>
<p>Extend this to tripple major, and you get the idea ;)</p>
<p>Kirbus: I know exactly what you mean. I still have to tell myself that, hehe</p>
<p>I'm sure it would be possible if you took many placement courses, didn't do anything outside of class, and didn't sleep (much). But then again, most who get in to MIT do so through their ECs, right? They, likewise, are actively involved outside of class, and probably sleep (lol!). Actually, from what I've been hearing from a few students, the average student sleeps about 4hrs per night and consumes a lot of caffeine!</p>
<p>I believe the general feel is that some signficant research experience will help you more than that second/third SB.</p>
<p>Which, if you're applying to grad school or med school, is definitely true.</p>
<p>I agree. MIT's biggest strength is it's many opportunities. There's so much to do and so little time. With all the interesting activities, available research projects, and enriching classes, MIT draws a diverse crowd of students -- all interested in learning and gaining from the excellent facilities. Though I would try to get a triple major, I'd probably end up with a double major with much difficulty. One always makes time for research. Sleep never seems to dominate over compelling ideas and projects :-). In a university as research-oriented as MIT, one simply can't put off research? Any idea as to what level students often get involved? Is it merely to put their name on the paper, or do they actually investigate their own novel ideas? Or do students just do the tedious calculations and busy work? Either way, a university like MIT has an almost infinite number of opportunities. Internships, Research, and Activities/Clubs are just some of the many things MIT has to offer. I can't wait till their descision (I hope I'm in! But then again, I'm probably deferred :-/).</p>
<p>Well, the really big difficulty with a triple major isn't finishing the requirements for three departments. The problem is that you have to finish more electives to get extra degrees -- you have to have 180 units outside the General Institute Requirements for a single major, and 270 units outside the GIRs for a double major. I presume you would need 360 units outside the GIRs for a triple major -- given the freshman credit limit, that means you'd have to average more than 6 classes per term. That's a lot.</p>
<p>As for undergraduate research, it really depends on what department you are. As a science undergraduate, I don't exactly investigate <em>my own</em> ideas -- that's not how academic science works for anyone. But I am given a lot of freedom to determine the direction of my project. I guess generally you're always going to be investigating somebody else's project, but that's because they're paying you from their precious grant money. I definitely don't just do the grunge work, like making solutions or washing dishes, like some of my friends at other schools who have "research positions" do.</p>
<p>I would note that there's not really such a thing as "just" putting your name on a paper. If your name is on a paper, it's because you contributed a significant amount of work to the project. People don't get their names on papers for doing grudge work.</p>