<p>Hi everyone. I am a ChemE/NE double major but I plan to switch my major into EECS/NE. However, for EECS/NE, I would need to take EECS 40 instead of EECS 100. I know that these two classes relatively teach the same concepts, but does anyone know which one is the weeder course? I have the impression that it is EECS 40, but I would like to know. Also, is it true that non-EECS majors are not allowed to take EECS 40 (if it is totally full). Also, does anyone know which course is the most demanding. Thanks!</p>
<p>Oh yes, EE40 is definitely a weeder.</p>
<p>It is true (or at least it was true, don't know about now) that EECS students had preference to get into EE40, so if the class is overflowing with EECS students, non-EECS students will have difficulty getting in.</p>
<p>Any weeder course tends to be far more demanding than a nonweeder course.</p>
<p>EE40 is not that bad. It will almost definitely be tougher than EE100, but that's because EE40 is meant for EECS majors while EE100 isn't. I don't know about the non-EECS being able to take EE40 or not, but last semester our class wasn't all that full, so I doubt getting in would be a problem. If you have any intention of going EECS, I'd recommend just taking 40. No point in taking 100 now only to have to take 40 later (plus, it really isn't that hard).</p>
<p>thanks for your reply guys. What I would like to know that is it possible for a junior transfer to petition when he is an upcoming senior. The reason being is because I have read that the College of Engineering does not allow junior transfers to change their majors. I do not have residence in the College of engineering but in the College of Chemistry. Also, does anyone know that petitioning for a 5th semester is guaranteed (since I most probably will need it because my ChemE courses will not satisfy any EECS courses). I will be making normal progress towards both degrees however. Thanks!</p>
<p>I've heard that petitioning for a 5th semester is almost guaranteed (not technically guaranteed, but basically everyone gets it).</p>
<p>As for petitioning for another college, I have no clue.</p>
<p>thanks eudean. However, does anyone heard or know a transfer student changing colleges/majors once admitted. My case was to try to petition b4 the semester started....but the CoE says that they don't review petitions in that way.</p>
<p>I must've taken EE40 after Sakky did. I took it and thought the material was challenging but wasn't nearly as difficult or competitive as chem 3b or some of the upper division engineering courses I took. I think the EECs department uses the CS61 series for most of their weeding nowadays. </p>
<p>As for transferring from ChemE to EECs as a junior, it will probably be extremely difficult. You are changing colleges (1), and haven't taken the equivalents of CS61a-c (2) and are trying to petition into one of the most difficult majors to get a spot in (3). Good luck, but if it doesn't work out, you at least have your BS in chemE/NE.</p>
<p>Thanks for your reply Calkidd. When I obtained the Engineering Announcement, it only indicated E 77 as the CS requirement for EECS/NE. This made me feel a lot better b/c I know and have heard horrible stories of students taking CS 61BC. I just don't understand why the engineering administration would not let me change my major before the semester begins. I mean, I already have my planned schedule till graduation (which I graduate on time) and I satisfied all of their lower division requirements since it heavily overlaps with ChemE/NE. The unfortunate part is that I had found out about this major while I was at my CalSO on June 30th and had discovered that Berkeley offers EECS/NE as a double major. Pretty sad.</p>
<p>Just on a side note, the CS 61-series is no more difficult than lower div EE (20 and 40). I wouldn't consider either to be more of a weeder series of courses than the other. Note that I took 61A, 61C, 20, and 40 all last year.</p>
<p>eudan...from your experience....is there a lot of CS topics involved in EE 40 and EE 20N?</p>
<p>Not at all. EE20N covers Signals and Systems, meaning state transition diagrams and equations and Fourier analysis (these are the main parts as far as I'm concerned). EE40 covers circuits, plain and simple. Start with Kirchoff's laws, node and mesh analysis, resistors, caps, inductors, RC, RLC circuits, semiconductors, diodes, and op-amps. The only semi-CS related stuff is in the EE20 labs, where you do Matlab programming (modeling state machines and stuff). It's really not very difficult, and they don't expect you to have experience programming.</p>
<p>eudan, I am assuming you are an EECS major. If you are, can you tell me your experiences with various EECS courses. How do you like EECS so far? Is there anything that you regret? Thanks!</p>
<p>You are correct, I am an EECS major (but I hope to pick up Engineering Physics as a double if I have the time). Before I go to far, let me say I've only take 61A, 61C, EE20N, and EE40 so far in the EECS department (since I'm only going to be a 2nd year), but I would say EECS is a great major at Berkeley. The main reason why is because there is a HUGE variety of classes to choose from when you get to upper div. (now, mind you, I haven't actually taken those classes yet, but bare with me).</p>
<p>If you take a look at what is offered at the upper div. level, you'll see that you can choose from a whole bunch of different courses, with a huge range of specialties (it seems almost insane that Operating System Programming can be in the same department as Semiconductor physics). You get to pick and choose a lot, which is great if you know what you want to study, but you will HAVE to pick and choose, which isn't so great if you want to do everything (it's just impossible).</p>
<p>With regards to the courses I've taken, I would say EE20N was so-so. My TA was an idiot (hope he isn't reading this...) and the professor was good but not great. The subject matter was not that interesting to me and I felt it just lingered too long on the boring stuff, and by the time it got interesting I just was disenchanted by the course already.</p>
<p>EE40 was much better subject matter wise, and the professor was about as good, maybe a little better. My TA was excellent and I enjoyed EE40 much more than 20N.</p>
<p>CS61A was pretty damn boring, but that may be because I had quite a bit of programming experience prior to entering the class. Usually (in fact, almost always) when I went to class I would just fall asleep for an hour, wake up and leave (still not sure why I went...). The professor was pretty boring, but my TA was absolutely spectacular (runner-up for best TA award at the end of the year). The class was easy, though.</p>
<p>CS61C was an awesome class, great professor, pretty good TA. The subject matter was interesting and the professor was really dynamic during lecture. It was harder than CS61A, but not too difficult. I would say it was the hardest of the EECS classes I've taken so far, but that's probably because I procrastinate like crazy when I get programming projects. Subject matter starts with C programming, then goes into computer architecture stuff (e.g. caches, CPU logic, memory, etc.) and Assembly programming.</p>
<p>I would say the most important part of having an enjoyable course is having a good professor and a good TA. Nothing makes for a better experience. Subject matter comes second. I don't have any regrets besides scheduling two finals on the same day last semester, which hurt the grades a little. Don't be afraid to drop courses, change your schedule, go to different discussions if you don't like your TA, etc. Things are pretty flexible, so take advantage and don't just sit around in a crappy TA's discussion if you don't have to.</p>
<p>Finally, don't listen to people when they tell you / complain to you that EECS is hard. It isn't. If you're lazy and don't go to class, well then yeah you might do pretty badly (e.g. some of my roommates first semester of last year). If you put in a decent amount of effort you can do well; it's not as hard as people make it out to be.</p>
<p>I agree, I know that CS courses are pretty tough. Yet, the major that I would like to pursue, EECS/NE, has only 1 CS requirement which is E 77. </p>
<p>The bad thing about my situation is that I am starting this fall as a transfer student as a ChemE/NE student. I was told quite frankly (by the administration) that I would not have a successful college/major change because of my status and that petitioning would delay my graduation. Therefore, they suggest that I pursue an EECS minor. In your opinion, should I pursue it or would it just be a waste of time since minors don't really help a person.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I must've taken EE40 after Sakky did. I took it and thought the material was challenging but wasn't nearly as difficult or competitive as chem 3b
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ha! I think we have to place that statement in context. Chem 3B is arguably the most notorious weeder out there.</p>
<p>Thanks for the warning. Note to self: don't take Chem 3B.</p>
<p>But back on topic, personally I would go for the EECS/NE double major. If you can't transfer in, then fine you can do something else. If you get delayed, who cares? Can't spend an extra semester in college? Study what you want to study, forget what the administration tells you. Give it a shot. If you don't make it, then whatever, you tried anyway, and can take the minor any day. I don't see a good reason not to apply for it and give it a shot.</p>
<p>lol...it's not that I cannot spend an extra semester in college....it is the that the College of Engineering wants me to graduate in 4 semesters rather than 5 semesters. Anyhow, in your opinon (others please comment if you have an opinion), do you think that a junior transfer who will petition after a year (upcoming senior status) will have an adequate chance than say to someone who is an upcoming junior status and petitioning will not delay graduation?</p>
<p>If you petition for an extra semester you will get an extra semester. This is what I've heard from junior transfers. If you petition for an extra TWO semester, you will NOT get the second semester (also what I've heard). This is just how things go: they're lenient on the first, but strict on the second.</p>