- Joined
- Jan 27, 2008
- Messages
- 80
- Reaction score
- 1
First...I was wrong to write in UF with FSU, UCF, USF... I took a few summer classes there a few years ago and it was not easy. It wasn'y cal poly but it was hard! (sorry to be such a harp on cal, but I remember several classes where 1 to 2 people got an A...My biochem class had 83 people, and 4 A's, two of which were retakes. After going to two other schools, I was shocked by how different the culture was)
I understand the idea that several people are writing about, that clearly some rankings must be taken...I guess that I am argueing that the idea that there isn't a concrete system is insane and harmful to our system.
I wish I could find the link on here, but I recently saw a show that talked about this; all from the prespective of a medical school admissions program. They spoke about how little they "trust" the grades of most anyone, and then went on to cite american college grade inflation as a reason that more foreigners are able to get in. ( I find this to be unsatisfactory and a cop out, but that is what they said)
Also, I do not want to leave out the countless other schools that run the same shell game...fl schools are prob no different than those all over the country in the fact that an education has become a commodity. (A lot of people much smarter than me have written some great books about this) In all, I think that the current method of selection is flawed, with the GPA being given a lot of cred even with no comparison to the program you were in...
A few things that confuse me:
Isn't nova (as well as several others) non-profit?
Why do we assign such horrible things to the admissions people? do we think they say, "well, I get a bonus this year if I let unqualified people in?" What motivation would they have? They get about 100 students paying admission one way or another...
Why is it that people not getting through seen as inherintly bad? To me, any program where 100% of people are getting through looks bad.Clearly there are limits to this, but a few who don't make it?
Why does everyone talk about Nova so much? Penn takes 160+... seven other schools take more people, yet are never mentioned on here. Why is that?
Anyway, good exchange
I understand the idea that several people are writing about, that clearly some rankings must be taken...I guess that I am argueing that the idea that there isn't a concrete system is insane and harmful to our system.
I wish I could find the link on here, but I recently saw a show that talked about this; all from the prespective of a medical school admissions program. They spoke about how little they "trust" the grades of most anyone, and then went on to cite american college grade inflation as a reason that more foreigners are able to get in. ( I find this to be unsatisfactory and a cop out, but that is what they said)
Also, I do not want to leave out the countless other schools that run the same shell game...fl schools are prob no different than those all over the country in the fact that an education has become a commodity. (A lot of people much smarter than me have written some great books about this) In all, I think that the current method of selection is flawed, with the GPA being given a lot of cred even with no comparison to the program you were in...
A few things that confuse me:
Isn't nova (as well as several others) non-profit?
Why do we assign such horrible things to the admissions people? do we think they say, "well, I get a bonus this year if I let unqualified people in?" What motivation would they have? They get about 100 students paying admission one way or another...
Why is it that people not getting through seen as inherintly bad? To me, any program where 100% of people are getting through looks bad.Clearly there are limits to this, but a few who don't make it?
Why does everyone talk about Nova so much? Penn takes 160+... seven other schools take more people, yet are never mentioned on here. Why is that?
Anyway, good exchange