Anonymous wrote:Trump, a Wharton grad, is an idiot -- his kids Ivanka and Jr have Wharton degrees and are obviously idiots -- Kushner has a Harvard BA and NYU JD and he's an idiot.
But it's not just rich kids -- look at the athletes. I bet most of Stanford's football team couldn't pass ONE genuine Stanford course, yet some of them are on campus for a few years. Sometimes they receive degrees!
Anonymous wrote:Look at how many Harvard students graduate with Latin honors...
Entitlement is rampant. We busted a Harvard student for falsifying a reference (actually impersonated a professor in a phone call--we tracked down the real professor.) Harvard was like, what are you gonna do? The professor told us the kid had plagiarized a paper and he had been told to give him an A. At least Harvard couldn't make me give the kid a job. But I don't consider resumes from Harvard undergrad anymore.
Anonymous wrote:I have a child at Harvard who is doing a science concentration. This quote stood out to me in particular for being inaccurate from her experiences.
Three biochemistry graduate students I knew and trusted all had an identical story. In the introductory course they taught, undergraduates weren’t required to show up at a single lecture or section; they could score in the teens on the final and still pass. The professor’s basis for leniency, they said, was that “they pay too much tuition for us to fail them.”
In lecture based courses, students are given exams with expectations set to slightly inflated standards (A = 90+, A- = 87-90, B+ = 83-87, B = 80-83, B- = 75-80, etc). The more difficult classes, like organic chemistry, have higher curves (A = 85+, B = 70+, C = 55+), but this is the case at many universities as well (Berkeley O'Chem, A= 80+, B = 70+, C = 60+). In general, students do extremely well, with a median consistently around the 90 range. This is not because they make the tests easier, but rather because the students are exceptionally capable and hard-working. The notion of scoring in the teens and passing seems unimaginable.
Anonymous wrote:I have a child at Harvard who is doing a science concentration. This quote stood out to me in particular for being inaccurate from her experiences.
Three biochemistry graduate students I knew and trusted all had an identical story. In the introductory course they taught, undergraduates weren’t required to show up at a single lecture or section; they could score in the teens on the final and still pass. The professor’s basis for leniency, they said, was that “they pay too much tuition for us to fail them.”
In lecture based courses, students are given exams with expectations set to slightly inflated standards (A = 90+, A- = 87-90, B+ = 83-87, B = 80-83, B- = 75-80, etc). The more difficult classes, like organic chemistry, have higher curves (A = 85+, B = 70+, C = 55+), but this is the case at many universities as well (Berkeley O'Chem, A= 80+, B = 70+, C = 60+). In general, students do extremely well, with a median consistently around the 90 range. This is not because they make the tests easier, but rather because the students are exceptionally capable and hard-working. The notion of scoring in the teens and passing seems unimaginable.
Anonymous wrote:Shame on Harvard and any of the ivies who already admit students for $$$$$$$
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/posteverything/wp/2017/09/19/how-harvard-helps-its-richest-and-most-arrogant-students-get-ahead/
Anonymous wrote:I have a child at Harvard who is doing a science concentration. This quote stood out to me in particular for being inaccurate from her experiences.
Three biochemistry graduate students I knew and trusted all had an identical story. In the introductory course they taught, undergraduates weren’t required to show up at a single lecture or section; they could score in the teens on the final and still pass. The professor’s basis for leniency, they said, was that “they pay too much tuition for us to fail them.”
In lecture based courses, students are given exams with expectations set to slightly inflated standards (A = 90+, A- = 87-90, B+ = 83-87, B = 80-83, B- = 75-80, etc). The more difficult classes, like organic chemistry, have higher curves (A = 85+, B = 70+, C = 55+), but this is the case at many universities as well (Berkeley O'Chem, A= 80+, B = 70+, C = 60+). In general, students do extremely well, with a median consistently around the 90 range. This is not because they make the tests easier, but rather because the students are exceptionally capable and hard-working. The notion of scoring in the teens and passing seems unimaginable.