Likely to fail if I go to a reach and want to major in "hard" sciences

Parent Cafe
21

<p>There was a study done at the University or Oregon that looked into what is the best predictor for a student to succeed as a Physics major. Their findings were that most significant was the Math SAT score. They found that while there were students who did very well in college in virtually every major, even with SAT scores in the 400s, for Physics there were no cases in which a student who scored lower than 600 on the Math SAT was able to do well in Physics at the college level. The researchers just looked at Physics but hypothesized the Math SAT score of 600 was also the minimum for success as Math and Engineering majors as well.</p>

<p>They also found that while it was possible for a student to succeed in Physics with a Math SAT score in the 600s with great effort, more typically the students who excelled in Physics at the college level had Math SAT scores of greater than 700.</p>

22

<p>Post #16, no I don’t work for Google. But when I was interviewing candidates fresh out of college, they usually have at least 3.5 from top 10 engineering schools such as U of Michigan, UCBerkeley, etc…</p>

23

<p>@Lemaitre1 I agree that the Steve Hsu studies are excellent but I think it was math and physics that exhibited cognitive thresholds not just physics. The studies can be found here [Information</a> Processing: Search results for cognitive threshold](<a href=“Information Processing: Search results for cognitive threshold]Information”>Information Processing: Search results for cognitive threshold) if others are interested.</p>

24

<p>quialah’s post should be repeated; if the school accepts you, hey believe you have the potential.
Many years ago, the worm went to a reach school, having studied math and physics on his own. First 2 terms were p/F, which gave him a chance to learn these subjects in a structured environment. I am also leery of people “knowing” they will major in physics, as many shift somewhere along the line as they are exposed to similar but, to them, more interesting options.</p>

<p>The 2 young mention I mention were successful in their grad school acceptances, admitted to MIT, P, Stanford, UCB, Yale, etc.</p>

25

<p>This issue isn’t whether the OP would fail out or get a terrible gpa out of the reach school. Clearly, that’s unlikely as schools won’t admit people they don’t think will succeed. But if the OP lacks significant exposure to math/physics it’s not clear he/she will succeed in those subjects. It’s also very possible that the OP will find they aren’t as interested in math/physics as he/she thought. If the OP has done a considerable amount of outside study of math/physics but just hasn’t taken calculus that shouldn’t be a problem but I’m under the impression that OP hasn’t seriously studied math/physics yet.</p>

26

<p>OP, you might want to research how students from your high school did at a certain college. One reach school that my daughter is very interested in applying(it’s a hard school with Pass/Fail criteria). Somehow I stumbled on a former high school student’s resume on the internet. She listed what she kind of GPA she had in high school and what she’s currently has at her college. It gives me a warm fuzzy feeling as what to expect for my daughter if she were admitted to this college.</p>

27

<p>Hi UMTYMP,</p>

<p>Let me be very clear so people can give me a more informed suggestion. My HS was not that great at math and hard sciences. For instance, I did not learn much about functions and exponentials in HS and did not do so well on the HS exams. I was able to learn quite a bit last year with the help of a tutor. I learned well enough to be able to get a great score on the ACT math standard test (which tests more advanced concepts than the SAT does). Physics and Chemistry was also not that great in my HS. It is not that “I don’t get it”. I also did well on the ACT Science component, but I know there are people out there who can jump into Calculus Physics and even Vector Mechanics, whereas I am not one of them.</p>

<p>Regarding my acceptance to the reach school, I think that my overall GPA, standard Scores, and ECs helped a lot. However, I probably would have been rejected by schools such as CalTech and MIT.</p>

28

<p>Then it sounds like you should be able to catch up without too much of a problem.</p>

29

<p>I doubt that folks in the bottom 25% of top colleges have particular problems in getting jobs. </p>

<p>Isn’t it true that about 3/4ers of college students change their majors at least once?</p>

<p>And it could go the other way, too. My younger d. was in the bottom 15% of the admitted class (in terms of SATs/ACTs) at her college. She ended up graduating in three years, magna cum laude, named top student in her department, and received a financial award for her graduate program (same university), the only one to which she applied. (oh, and her GREs were even worse than her SAT/ACTs were.)</p>

30

<p>

At my company, the 3.0 resume would hit the trash can. The 3.5 would need to do really well on the phone screen to be invited for an interview, but not likely.</p>

31

<p>

</p>

<p>Science requires or prefers a different style of writing than humanities does. This does not mean that writing ability is necessarily “worse”, but it does mean that a writer must know his/her audience when writing an article (e.g. writing an article for Science or Nature would require a different style from writing an article for Scientific American). A scientist may have the opposite complaint about other styles of writing that can be excessively wordy while still being inexact in what they are trying to communicate (although, in some cases, the inexactness is intentional, as in political propaganda).</p>

<p>Effectively communicating science topics to the general public may be a relatively rare competency, in that it requires the understanding of science that a scientist has, but the ability to write in a style that is more accessible to the general public.</p>

32

<p>

</p>

<p>Actually, they looked at both math and physics majors, but hypothesized that the results would be similar for engineering majors (which were not included because the University of Oregon does not have engineering as a major).</p>

<p>[[1011.0663</a>] Nonlinear Psychometric Thresholds for Physics and Mathematics](<a href=“http://arxiv.org/abs/1011.0663][1011.0663”>[1011.0663] Nonlinear Psychometric Thresholds for Physics and Mathematics)</p>

<p>On the other hand, math SAT scores were found to have no predictive value overall (i.e. all students in all majors) on college GPAs at University of California campuses – perhaps because those with lower math SAT scores chose non-math-intensive majors.</p>

<p><a href=“Publications | Center for Studies in Higher Education”>Publications | Center for Studies in Higher Education;

33

<p>I’d like to be able to give you some advice, Inpersonal, but I don’t know whether you will be able to succeed in a math/physics major at a reach school. I can point to a few factors that might influence your likelihood of success, though.</p>

<p>First, and I think most important: Are you willing and able to spend 5 years to complete the undergrad degree? And will the school permit that? HYP tend to graduate an extremely high fraction of the students (probably 90%+) in four years. You will not be able to take the first physics course for physics majors, when you start–or at least, that would be highly inadvisable even if your school allows co-requisites in place of pre-requisites. The physics course for majors is calculus-based, and you will be better off–practically infinitely better off–if you’ve had the math courses ahead of the physics courses that use them. This also applies to multi-variable calculus and the electricity & magnetism course.</p>

<p>How is your work ethic? Do you know other people who are math/physics majors at the school you are considering? Do you know how many hours per week they spend on academic work, on the average? There was a separate thread on the hours of “homework” for freshman. I suggested that in a math/physical sciences intensive field at a reasonably good school, 50-60 hours a week would not be uncommon (assuming that the student wants to do well, as opposed to setting the goal of staying in school). Are you willing to spend a lot of time on academic work when students in other majors are out having fun? (Serious issue)</p>

<p>Do you have a firm grasp of the math you have taken? Did you take the SAT II in math? If so, how did you do? If not, borrow one of the SAT guides from your local library, and try out the Math I and Math II tests in it, under approximate test conditions. If you have a clear understanding of the material you’ve already seen, your odds are better.</p>

<p>Do you read math or science for fun? A huge fraction of the students who do well in math or physics have been doing this and will continue.</p>

<p>What is it about math/physics that interests you? If the classes are not going well, despite strong efforts, are you willing to shift to another major?</p>

<p>Finally, several posters have noted that if the school admits you, they believe that you can do the work. I’d say that if the school admits you, the admissions office believes that you can graduate from the university. This is different from the statement that the professors in a given field believe that you can do the work in that field. A few of the faculty in my field at several different “top” schools have remarked to me that they wonder how about 15% of the students in their classes were admitted. (This is not an anti-AA statement, since I know that they support AA. I am essentially certain that they meant non-URM’s. At HYP one could chalk this up to legacies, athletes, relatives of major donors . . . , but the same comment has been made to me by MIT faculty, where none of those circumstances count for much.)</p>

<p>Then there is the issue of what your GPA means for your future. I think you will need to have a 3.0 GPA overall and in your major, to have reasonable chances of employment in your major (and MisterK will toss out your resume at that level, even so). In physics, it seems to me that you will need at least a 3.5 to have a chance at admission to a good graduate school. The minimum GPA for a good grad school, when coming from a strong undergrad program, does vary by field. In chemistry, I think you could get in with a 3.0, significant lab experience, and good recommendations. I do have the impression that physics requires a stronger classroom performance, however.</p>

<p>Hope this is of some help. I think that the “cognitive threshold” effect seen in Oregon is not an absolute. It is not the case that skill in math and science is “frozen in” at the time you enter college–instead, skill can be developed to a great degree. However, it does take a lot of work, and I think the “cognitive threshold” results more from discouragement and lack of opportunity/willingness to put in the time required. Physics and math take a lot of time for the best prepared.</p>

34

<p>I am wondering if a better plan would be to take a gap year and work and take the missing math so that you could hit college in a better position.</p>

35

<p>Thanks QuantMech. That was a very good post and I’ll think carefuly abou what you say.
Clearly I am not ready for HYP (and SMCaltech) calculus based physics as you said. I believe I will not be able to take a Gap Year, but I am planning to take Calculs at a local CC over the summer. I think my decision now will be between a more “soft” major at a top college, or a more “hard” major at a state school.</p>

36

<p>Taking calculus at a CC over the summer seems like an excellent idea even if you have to retake it next year. You can always try the “hard” major at the reach school and then switch to the “soft” major if things don’t go well. There’s nothing unusual in doing such a switch at most schools.</p>

37

<p>You can try this on-line placement test to see how ready you are to take calculus:</p>

<p>[Calculus</a> Placement Exam | Department of Mathematics at University of California Berkeley](<a href=“http://math.berkeley.edu/courses/choosing/placement-exam]Calculus”>http://math.berkeley.edu/courses/choosing/placement-exam)</p>

<p>(Note: Math 1A = calculus for math-intensive majors, Math 16A is calculus for business majors, and Math 32 is precalculus for students who need more preparation before taking Math 1A or 16A.)</p>

38

<p>Just going to add a 2cents: </p>

<p>S took AP Calc as a senior in HS. Got an A and a 5. Not a bad math student, and not a great one either. Has never been a huge physics kind of guy. Was recommended to take Calc II first semester freshman year. Without the study group, he would have definitely had a much harder time. But my point is really only that I’ve yet to meet anyone who even in taking calculus in high school did not hugely benefit from taking the same course again at college, especially if it is a subject pertinent to your major. Me? I barely got through logic and stats. But S had lots of holes to fill from AP Calc to College level Calc II. </p>

<p>I will agree there is a wide variance of work and expectation at some of these “elite” schools. However, among those that are considered reaches by many, I think the hardest part is simply getting in. And as I’ve said, the best academic resources free to students seem to be provided at the elite schools. Their retention and graduation rates more or less depend on it, and therefore so do their standings in the very arbitrary rankings.</p>

<p>As for the writing thing… I know exactly what your saying USBAlumnus and is pretty much the exact conversation we had over Christmas break. S does indeed have a talent for explaining the complicated in simplistic terms (otherwise I would have absolutely no understanding of what he is studying!). I think he was mostly comparing my background with what he had done first semester, which was essentially writing sections for a proposed textbook. Great opportunity, but very different kind of writing indeed. You have to assume the reader knows something, but you also have to explain things in context. All I know is I am better at typing wickedly fast without any kind of edit on CC. :)</p>

39

<p>We give a technical pre-qualifying exam, then rank applicants based on that. Then we interview. We don’t give a rat’s you-know-what about GPA - we don’t look or ask for it. We’re hiring three entry level engineers this week, and looking to hire ten more down the road. We always seem to be hiring, because our engineers keep leaving, I guess for greener pastures. We don’t seem to get the flood of applicants other places do either, so maybe we’re not that desirable a place to work, although our engineers start at around 60K. But it’s a job, so although it is preferable to have a higher GPA it is possible for some folks to find employment without it. But, of course, the higher the better.</p>

40

<p>I don’t think anyone has made this point:</p>

<p>It may not matter much if you are way behind other people in your field when you start college. Or when you finish, for that matter. At the outset, you won’t be taking the same courses. You won’t (you shouldn’t) push yourself to take the highest math possible; you should take the right math for your level, and work up from there systematically. You may not be able to start Intro Physics your first semester – you may have to wait until your sophomore year, maybe even junior year. That doesn’t mean you can’t major in Physics (although it may mean you have to take an extra semester to complete the requirements, maybe two). And if you take the right courses for your level, and you work hard at them, and have the basic motivation and aptitude, you will do fine and your GPA will be fine. </p>

<p>What’s more, you will have a great base for learning more, and you may well come out a better physicist for it. Maybe you are 18-24 months behind the hottest physics students going into college, and from the perspective of a 4-year BS program that seems like a lot. But from the perspective of a 60-year career, it’s nothing. If you keep at it, and learn the right stuff at the right time, learning it well, you will be in a perfectly good position to do whatever you dream of doing soon enough.</p>