Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This thread is like a slow motion car wreck--too ugly to pass up.

Since it is me who you besmirched, let me whip out my textbooks:

For the LAC stats class, we had Larsen and Marx, "Mathematical Statistic and its Applications." You damn well better have calculus to follow this book, but linear algebra is less important as the course was less applied.
For the LAC undergraduate econometrics course, we used Gujarati, "Basic Econometrics." This course did not require linear algebra as a prerequisite, but all the basic intuitions of Econometrics can be derived using only two independent variables. No if I am not mistaken, the course started using Maddala after my time, but, hey, that over 30 years ago. (It's not surprising that the course didn't require linear algebra: there wouldn't be sufficient student demand for such a course.)

Gujarati is a great book—for absolute beginners. We used to joke that Gujarati was like your grandfather who would put you on his knee and explain everything in simple language. Maddala is also not all that challenging. The thread isn’t about your grad school classes because we’re comparing to undergrad.

A magnet statistics class is definitely the equivalent of a college statistics class that uses Gujarati. Now a kid who wants to *major* in stats or math wouldn’t want to be taking the Gujarati-level class anyway, but that’s a minority of kids. This is a key point that everybody here is missing: not every magnet kid wants to go into statistics and therefore needs to knock out a rigorous statistics track starting in high school. Many of them just want to knock out that statistics requirement for their pre-med or other studies, and magnet statistics is a good way to get there.

Gujarati is not a Statistics book; it's an Econometrics book. See, it says so in the title. If you can't comprehend the difference, I don't think there is much hope for you. I agree that Gujarati was pretty basic for me, but not all Economics majors are strong in Math.
And how is it that we are comparing undergraduate courses? The statement was that the linear regression taught at Blair was equivalent to a graduate Econometrics (I assume that is what you mean, although you've called it a statistics course originally) at UPenn.

(Was it Wharton, Economics in the Arts and Science school, or Applied Economics?)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you've proven yourself to be a deceitful little shithead. First you claim you didn't besmirch me when you claim that I, an Economics PhD, do not know what a logit is. More examples can readily be found in the previous pages. Now you claim that I claimed that a magnet class was never was equivalent to a college level class. That is a ridiculous statement that is obviously false. If that were true, all incoming college students would start at the same math level.
Note well that I have never accused you of TJ-envy, just lunacy. See a doctor for appropriate medication.

Whoa. Not that pp, but she said that you can’t use the expression “logit regression.” She’s right, nobody says that.

Anonymous wrote:So you've proven yourself to be a deceitful little shithead. First you claim you didn't besmirch me when you claim that I, an Economics PhD, do not know what a logit is. More examples can readily be found in the previous pages. Now you claim that I claimed that a magnet class was never was equivalent to a college level class. That is a ridiculous statement that is obviously false. If that were true, all incoming college students would start at the same math level.
Note well that I have never accused you of TJ-envy, just lunacy. See a doctor for appropriate medication.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This thread is like a slow motion car wreck--too ugly to pass up.

Since it is me who you besmirched, let me whip out my textbooks:

For the LAC stats class, we had Larsen and Marx, "Mathematical Statistic and its Applications." You damn well better have calculus to follow this book, but linear algebra is less important as the course was less applied.
For the LAC undergraduate econometrics course, we used Gujarati, "Basic Econometrics." This course did not require linear algebra as a prerequisite, but all the basic intuitions of Econometrics can be derived using only two independent variables. No if I am not mistaken, the course started using Maddala after my time, but, hey, that over 30 years ago. (It's not surprising that the course didn't require linear algebra: there wouldn't be sufficient student demand for such a course.)

Gujarati is a great book—for absolute beginners. We used to joke that Gujarati was like your grandfather who would put you on his knee and explain everything in simple language. Maddala is also not all that challenging. The thread isn’t about your grad school classes because we’re comparing to undergrad.

A magnet statistics class is definitely the equivalent of a college statistics class that uses Gujarati. Now a kid who wants to *major* in stats or math wouldn’t want to be taking the Gujarati-level class anyway, but that’s a minority of kids. This is a key point that everybody here is missing: not every magnet kid wants to go into statistics and therefore needs to knock out a rigorous statistics track starting in high school. Many of them just want to knock out that statistics requirement for their pre-med or other studies, and magnet statistics is a good way to get there.

Anonymous wrote:So you've proven yourself to be a deceitful little shithead. First you claim you didn't besmirch me when you claim that I, an Economics PhD, do not know what a logit is. More examples can readily be found in the previous pages. Now you claim that I claimed that a magnet class was never was equivalent to a college level class. That is a ridiculous statement that is obviously false. If that were true, all incoming college students would start at the same math level.
Note well that I have never accused you of TJ-envy, just lunacy. See a doctor for appropriate medication.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In general, Blair magnet classes resemble AP classes somewhat, but they're condensed into one semester, and they’re coordinated with other classes like comp sci so that the subject matter can overlap. Blair magnet students can take the AP tests, although for many classes this requires independent study because the magnet curriculum doesn’t always track the AP curriculum.

The Blair magnet coordinator and team routinely work with the STEM departments at schools like RPI and others to establish that the magnet class was indeed equivalent to their college-level classes.

Hope that helps. (Ducks for incoming from the TJ parent.)

Incoming TJ parent here:
I'm not sure what your point is. Both TJ and Blair claim their course are equivalent to college-level classes. OK. I don't think either claim that they substitute for an entire undergraduate math department. I don't think either claim that the courses are equivalent to graduate courses. I've never compared TJ and Blair except to the extent of the obnoxiousness of their posters on DCUM.

Anonymous wrote:

This thread is like a slow motion car wreck--too ugly to pass up.

Since it is me who you besmirched, let me whip out my textbooks:

For the LAC stats class, we had Larsen and Marx, "Mathematical Statistic and its Applications." You damn well better have calculus to follow this book, but linear algebra is less important as the course was less applied.
For the LAC undergraduate econometrics course, we used Gujarati, "Basic Econometrics." This course did not require linear algebra as a prerequisite, but all the basic intuitions of Econometrics can be derived using only two independent variables. No if I am not mistaken, the course started using Maddala after my time, but, hey, that over 30 years ago. (It's not surprising that the course didn't require linear algebra: there wouldn't be sufficient student demand for such a course.)

Anonymous wrote:In general, Blair magnet classes resemble AP classes somewhat, but they're condensed into one semester, and they’re coordinated with other classes like comp sci so that the subject matter can overlap. Blair magnet students can take the AP tests, although for many classes this requires independent study because the magnet curriculum doesn’t always track the AP curriculum.

The Blair magnet coordinator and team routinely work with the STEM departments at schools like RPI and others to establish that the magnet class was indeed equivalent to their college-level classes.

Hope that helps. (Ducks for incoming from the TJ parent.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That’s all you’ve got? How childish. Now can we return to discussing magnet students without your hostile snark about magnet students and their families? TIA!

LOL you back? I am just pulling your chain. don't get mad.

Nope, different pp. You need to let the adults talk.

Anonymous wrote:

That’s all you’ve got? How childish. Now can we return to discussing magnet students without your hostile snark about magnet students and their families? TIA!

LOL you back? I am just pulling your chain. don't get mad.

That’s all you’ve got? How childish. Now can we return to discussing magnet students without your hostile snark about magnet students and their families? TIA!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


My textbook at Penn: Johnston’s Econometrics Methods. It’s on my shelf at work. Some of us turned to Maddala when Johnston was too opaque, but Maddala wasn’t assigned. This was in the heyday of Wharton Econometrics, several Wharton Econometrics principals taught in Penn’s Econ Department, and my prof was one of them. Penn’s Econ Department was at the time one of the most quantitative in the country, in econ as well as stats. I should probably clarify, for the bully who doesn’t know what a logit is, that Wharton Econometrics was in its heyday in the 80s and 90s, when it was the #1 econometrics consulting firm in the country.

You can’t cover OLS until you’ve covered distributions and basic stats like t and f tests (otherwise r-squared isn’t going to make sense) and things like ANOVA. You also need to know how to invert a matrix, at least for as long as the course lasts. These aren’t actually simple topics for newbies, and lots of colleges take them slow.

OK. I have to go back to work.

This thread is like a slow motion car wreck--too ugly to pass up.

Since it is me who you besmirched, let me whip out my textbooks:

For the LAC stats class, we had Larsen and Marx, "Mathematical Statistic and its Applications." You damn well better have calculus to follow this book, but linear algebra is less important as the course was less applied.
For the LAC undergraduate econometrics course, we used Gujarati, "Basic Econometrics." This course did not require linear algebra as a prerequisite, but all the basic intuitions of Econometrics can be derived using only two independent variables. No if I am not mistaken, the course started using Maddala after my time, but, hey, that over 30 years ago. (It's not surprising that the course didn't require linear algebra: there wouldn't be sufficient student demand for such a course.)
My graduate econometrics course used, surprise, surprise, Johnston. I don't remember it every being so obtuse that I needed to refer back to my undergraduate textbook.
My econometrics field courses used Judge et al, "The Theory and Practice of Econometrics" and Amemiya, "Advanced Econometrics." There, I've probably outed where I went to grad school.

Of course you can learn OLS without having to invert a matrix: there are computer programs for this. Obviously r-squared makes sense with knowing what t-test and f-tests are: It's simply the explained sum of squares divided by the total sum of squares. And since you ragged me for saying logit rather than the pretentious logistic regression, I say that you must be a psychiatrist since only they say ANOVA rather than analysis of variance.
If we are insisting on pretense, I insist that you address me as Dr. Anonymous.

No, I am not ragging on Wharton either.

So, my kid at TJ (this is not a brag) knows how to fit a line using her TI-64 (or whatever) graphing calculator. Does this mean she is learning linear regression? In a sense, yes, but that doesn't say anything about the difficulty of the class or its comparability to college.

TSP stands for Time Series Processor and was viewed as a better Econometrics program for time series. While some folks used SAS and SPSS, others used matrix programs like MATLAB. Of course, some of us would program in FORTRAN and use things like the IMSL library.

Pp again, the one you declared you were going to “beat down,” not either of the two posters immediately above who pointed out your kid is at TJ. Get a grip: I didn’t “besmirch” you, instead you attacked Blair magnet parents and announced a “beat down” (your own words) on me. People here are just defending themselves against you.

This just piles on with the flakiness. SPSS and MATLAB are irrelevant to your attack on me because nobody used them when I was in grad school, so it’s unclear where you’re going with this. I’m pretty sure my kid at Blair inverted a matrix, although again this was just a few years ago, anyway I’m sorry your kid just used the TI calculator. I’m not a psychiatrist, I do quantitative research in a specific economics field at an institution you’ve definitely, certainly, absolutely heard of and would probably die to work at. And so on.

I think my point is clear to the sane people on this thread. I’m done tussling with you, bye.

Please don't come back.