Question about difficulty

Colleges and Universities A-Z Cornell University
21

<p>I'd have to agree that the student body at Cornell won't be anything like that at MIT or Princeton. But Cornell engineering is by no means a walk in the park either. It's generally pretty stressful, though the difficulty will depend on your natural abilities and how hard-working you are. </p>

<p>It's not that hard to get a decent GPA here. An MIT-caliber student should have no problem getting a 4.0 here. But unless you're special/talented enough to get into places like MIT, you're probably going to meet a surprising number of people who are smarter than you and are able to outperform you. In my experience, the difficult part isn't getting a good GPA, but getting the GPA you want/trying to keep up with your brighter friends.</p>

<p>If you're interested in the educational experience and aren't as concerned about your GPA, Cornell won't disappoint you. At least I think I learned a lot more this past year than I did in like two years of high school, lol.</p>

22

<p>...........................................</p>

23

<p>
[quote]
Comparing engineering schools, confirmed by our daughter's first year at Cornell, I'd say Cornell is the most state-school like where there's a sense of weed-out, boot camp challenge. It is a challenge for students coming from lesser high schools, who are playing catchup with classmates who are repeating the subjects.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I tend to agree with the assessment, but I wouldn't go as far as to lump Cornell with all of the state schools. There will still be more resources per student, advising, and opportunities at Cornell than at most of the premiere state school engineering programs. So while it has more of a state school-vibe, it also offers the benefits of being a private institution.</p>

<p>
[quote]
most cornell classes are curved to around a B- (2.7 to ur gpa) or sometimes even a C+.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is not true at all! Stop being a stressed out engineer and perpetuating silly myths! A quick glance through the median grade reports will indicate very few courses below a median grade of a B. Even the notorious "weed out" classes for engineers -- computer science, chemistry, calculus sequence, etc. -- have a median grade of a B. And truthfully, those are the courses that you want to be difficult because that will give you an idea as to whether or not you really want to be an engineer. And a lot of the engineering courses have a median grade of a B+ or A-. </p>

<p><a href="http://registrar.sas.cornell.edu/Grades/MedianGradeFA07.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://registrar.sas.cornell.edu/Grades/MedianGradeFA07.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
that I think Cornell engineering is of comparable difficulty to Stanford

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, Stanford engineering is much easier. The kids are smarter on average, but the course loads are much easier than Cornell as sandpit claims.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'd have to agree that the student body at Cornell won't be anything like that at MIT or Princeton.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If you think about it, there are almost more kids at Cornell with over a 1500 SAT (math and verbal) than the entire Princeton undergraduate student body. So I would say that at least the top half (if not more) are just as intelligent as Princeton students, maybe just a bit less well-rounded or interesting.</p>

24

<p>
[quote]
Yea... to whoever said Cornell is easier than MIT, I don't think it is that much easier. Granted, most MIT kids are smarter than Cornell engineers... but the curve at cornell is so hard that I think Cornell engineering is of comparable difficulty to Stanford, and of a little less difficulty than MIT. MIT classes are usually curved up to around a B+... most cornell classes are curved to around a B- (2.7 to ur gpa) or sometimes even a C+.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>How is it then so many MIT students struggle to keep their gpa above 3.0? On this board and in real life, I heard numerous accounts where MIT students and alums complained how ridiculously hard the grading is at MIT compared to other elite schools. Sure, Cornell is a hard school, but CalTech and MIT, no doubt, are arguably two hardest schools at undergrad level in terms of grading and contents.</p>

25

<p>I never said Cornell engineering is as hard as MIT or Caltech in grading. I simply said cornell engineering is not that much easier. Average freshman engineering gpa is a 2.7 here, so plenty of people struggle to maintain a 3.0 as well. Kids aren't stupid here either, as CayugaRed mentioned that there are more 1500's here in the engineering school than there are at all of Princeton.. And CayugaRed, median grade reports might not indicate what a class is curved to. Math 191, 192, 293, 294, physics 213, (sometimes physics 112), and bio 101/102 are all curved to a B- even though some of these courses have a median grade of a B.</p>

26

<p>
[quote]
I'd have to agree that the student body at Cornell won't be anything like that at MIT

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Most people here seem to think that MIT's entering class is stronger than CoE, but I was under the impression that the class statistics were about the same.</p>

<p>Cornell</a> Engineering : Class Profile</p>

<p>That web page depicts the CoE class of 2011 with SAT and class rank stats that are about the same as MIT.</p>

<p>Is there a difference is class quality because of the difference in yield or is there some other reason?</p>

27

<p>Hmm, I didn't realize our stats were that high, haha. I'm not saying Cornell engineers aren't smart... the student body here is undoubtedly very strong. In fact, despite what I said above, most of my engineering friends are noticeably smarter than I am. I'm just saying that MIT is still going to have many more extremely talented students, seeing as it's the best engineering school in the world and its admissions is notoriously selective.</p>

28

<p>
[quote]
Most people here seem to think that MIT's entering class is stronger than CoE, but I was under the impression that the class statistics were about the same.</p>

<p>Cornell Engineering : Class Profile

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Those are for admitted students, not matriculated.</p>

<p>Matriculated SAT percentiles are probably 1350 - 1510 or so for engineering.</p>

<p>And yes, Cornell Engineering's yield rate for regular decision students is really low -- the lowest in the University. It's less than 30 percent. This is mainly due to the fact that a lot of the common admits are going to Stanford and MIT. I don't think Cornell is losing that many common admits to places like CMU or RPI.</p>

29

<p>Based on evidence of those that got into MIT from my school, I observed that they were either academically decent female students or male students that have won significant awards in science or math related areas (Siemens, Intel, USAMO, RSI(duh), IMO). In Cornell's CoE, they seemed to accept academically decent students that haven't won these kinds of prestigious awards. So, I'd have to say that MIT kids are probably several steps above Cornell engineering kids.</p>

30

<p>ohh, I see. So basically its Stanford/MIT kids who apply to cornell, matriculate at stanford/MIT and inflate the admitted student stats at Cornell in the process. Thanks for the info.</p>

31

<p>I just want to compliment CayugaRed. On thread after thread, you demonstrate a profound and vast understanding of Cornell culture. It's like you somehow experienced or know people who experienced every aspect of the school. </p>

<p>Also - after some heated discussions on other boards (ahem...Duke), it's nice to see you Cornell people seem to have a pretty realistic assessment (and perhaps even lower than reality) of your school in comparison to other top programs. Even more refreshing is that you are okay with it and still seem to really appreciate what you're getting out of your education.</p>

<p>Just a couple observations. Back to the bru-ha.</p>

32

<p>I agree with this observation. I can't speak for all of the boards but I find Cornell posters to be far more realistic about their school than many posters from other schools. Some tend to think that Cornell's students are less happy because everything isn't all peaches and puppies on this board but I think it just makes this board more informative since you can get both positive and negative opinions about Cornell.</p>

33

<p>I completely disagree with the assessment of how realistic Cornellians are about their school. This is the first thread where a slightly negative opinion has been met with favor rather than disdain. In plenty of other threads, the idea that Cornellians, on average, aren't as academically gifted as those at say HYP was lambasted (i.e. two involving meurtopablo entitled something like "Cornell is worst Ivy" and another one around the same time). Yet, the same sentiment seems to be accepted in this thread. Furthermore, in this thread, the idea of SAT scores as an indicator of academic strength has been supported. Other times, people have almost universally criticized this as a measure or indicator of academic performance, especially in the context of Cornell's scores being significantly lower than their peers'.</p>

34

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/cornell-university/463186-cornell-worst-ivy.html?highlight=Cornell%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/cornell-university/463186-cornell-worst-ivy.html?highlight=Cornell&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I believe this is the thread you are referring to. I don't have any problems with people calling Cornell the least selective Ivy (because that is true) but I do have a problem with people calling Cornell the "worst" Ivy. I don't see how that implies people are somehow unrealistic since what is "best" and "worst" is simply a matter of opinion.</p>

<p>Read the first page. Just on that page alone there are at least 4-5 people (including me) who pointed out that Cornell is the least selective Ivy. No one's arguing any different. The reason we didn't get flamed while muertopablo did, for essentially saying the same thing, is that he is a douchebag. His posts come off as condescending, arrogant, and elitist.</p>

35

<p>Can't even offer a simple compliment without flaming somebody up. </p>

<p>Dontno - First off, I don't know of anyone who's said Cornell is on par with HYP. Most who know Cornell would agree it is firmly entrenched in the tier below. I think what you're referring to is the fact that Cornell is far more diverse in its offerings, requiring significantly different types of intelligences to pursue different fields. Therefore, when people make a blanket statement about all of Cornell in comparison to any school, it is impossible to adequately do and usually makes Cornell look worse than it actually is when looking at just the programs that overlap between schools. Most people criticizing Cornell do not make this distinction and rather incorporate overall SAT scores or overall whatever in making comparisons.</p>

<p>Focusing just on engineering, as this thread does, it is easier to compare apples to apples and I'm sure many would argue that SAT scores are a more appropriate indicator of the necessary type of engineering intelligence than, say, for architecture or writing or agribusiness or hotel management.</p>

<p>I didn't mean to take this thread off topic. I was just making a passing observation.</p>

36

<p>
[quote]
Furthermore, in this thread, the idea of SAT scores as an indicator of academic strength has been supported. Other times, people have almost universally criticized this as a measure or indicator of academic performance, especially in the context of Cornell's scores being significantly lower than their peers'.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There are a lot of problems with the SATs, but they are useful at the end of the day as an apples to apples comparison between schools. So my comparison to Princeton wasn't out of line with my belief that there are limits to the use of SATs.</p>

<p>The major problem with SAT scores is that they are correlated with income, as wealthier families have more resources to spend on private classes, retests, and personal tutors. So if one school enrolls a more socioeconomically diverse class of students than the other, it would follow that SAT scores might not be as strong. And Cornell is a lot more socioeconomically diverse place than Princeton.</p>

<p>Personally, I don't find anything wrong Cornell accepting students with slightly lower SAT scores provided the adcoms believe that the students are capable of doing the work. That's really a central foundation to the principles of the University. If you don't believe me, just read the cover story of this month's alumni magazine.</p>

<p><a href="http://cornellalumnimagazine.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=117%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://cornellalumnimagazine.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=117&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I'm sure if Cornell wanted to they could improve their average SAT score for the entering class by at least 20-30 points, but there are other factors to consider.</p>

37

<p>
[quote]
I completely disagree with the assessment of how realistic Cornellians are about their school.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>But no. I do agree with you that a lot of Cornellians are a bit unrealistic about their strengths. A lot of students will think that they are just as smart as everybody at Harvard or MIT, which is obviously not the case. Typically the students who will tell this to you are the ones who are not as strong.</p>

<p>That said, a lot of Cornellians are smarter than a lot of students at places like Harvard or Princeton. It's a question of means, distributions, and raw numbers.</p>

38

<p>"The major problem with SAT scores is that they are correlated with income, as wealthier families have more resources to spend on private classes, retests, and personal tutors. "</p>

<p>i really dont like it when people say that wealthier students have a better advantage. anyone can buy a book...or even go to their local school or community library to use a study guide. it is really all about the willingness, drive, and determination on the students part to do well. you can pay for every single SAT course and tutor in the world, but until the student is disciplined enough to sit down and actually study, all of those private classes essentially go to waste. ive seen many students from affluent families perform badly on the SATs and vice versa.</p>

39

<p>^^
You clearly did not grow up without money. There's a huge difference. A parallel would be something I experienced in sports. I played lacrosse at a very expensive private high school (I was there on scholarship/financial aid). In the summers, I would have to work hard manual labor to make money while my teammates spent their summers going from lacrosse camp to lacrosse camp getting better. It is not just an issue of motivation. It's an issue of time, resources, and guidance from people who know what they are talking about. I could throw a ball against a wall all night after an exhausting day of work, but it doesn't compare to someone spending their entire summer teaching you the proper way to do it and playing in organized groups that simulate real game scenarios. </p>

<p>The same is true for SAT. Sure, motivation is a factor. But what about when you have to work two jobs while you're going to school or go to a school that has failed to teach you basics? </p>

<p>I mean, come on. Test scores are completely related to income and opportunity. Do you really think students are inherently more stupid in inner city or poor rural schools and that elite private schools just happen to have the smartest people that go to the best schools? One of my best friends grew up in the inner city Baltimore projects - was shot at several times, a drug dealer, tried to kill himself a few times. Really intelligent, motivated guy, but he can't do basic math to save his life because he was never taught at a young enough age where it was engrained without major hurdles.</p>

<p>money, money, money. opportunity, opportunity, opportunity.</p>

40

<p>^^I wrote a practice MCAT essay on that topic :-)</p>

<p>And...I do agree with applejack. I grew up in a single parent household and my mom worked all the time. I had great difficulty in math, but lucky for me my school recognized I had potential and my teachers were willing to work after school with me. I am so thankful for them...I know I wouldn't have had a shot at college without that crucial reinforcement. Sadly, many children in that situation don't get the help they need and it affects them later on.</p>