Why does /sci/ refuse to acknowledge the huge disparity in university quality? You get topics filled with people talking about their grades in Calc 1 and Calc 2 etc. You may as well talk about how long pieces of string are. Places like MIT do Calc 1 to 3 in two courses any way. And still have more content. And Caltech does proofs etc on day one. And that's just the disparity in two maths courses. Now imagine four times that difference every year because there are 8 courses, multiplied by four for every year of the degree, multiplied by being surrounded by smarter people rather than the dumb normies who got shit school grades.
Also another way you can tell that /sci/ goes to bad unis is when they boast "99 % of my CS101: Java Syntax class failed." How the fuck is this a boast? The shitter universities have higher drop out rates (a few exceptions, when they take many people but weed them out, but this is rare and mainly very prestigious nationalised institutions). Hard working students almost always pass. If a Harvard guy goes up to me and says "99 % of people passed CS101" I'm not going to see Harvard as shit.
When I once posted a problem from the first year Oxford maths course on here as a way to troll people at worse universities, I got tonnes of abuse.
Also I'm not an Ivy league guy. I'm a guy who went to a uni ranked 100 - 150 in the world and I am as butthurt as anyone can get. My anus is redder than a cherry dipped in blood. Don't think I'm trolling. Also there are very few exceptions to the stuff I say: I mainly think of Germany, or other mainland Euro countries (not France), where I think there is more equality due to government intervention or something (or maybe we just never hear about them).
>inb4 only grad school matters
Yeah, sure, 4 years of the difference in quality I talked about contributes zero difference to grad school performance...
>>7732758
Literally take nothing /sci/ says about education seriously.
>>7732758
I've actually compared the coursework of an equivalent MIT engineering degree to mine and it they have far less required courses and skip a lot of work I consider fundamental to my field. Though I do assume that the higher quality students take those courses as electives in their weird system anyway, but it should strictly speaking be required for their degree to be accredited.
They're really only good at aerospace and mechanical engineering.
>Dropout rates aren't high at prestigious universities!
Wrong:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_55
You seem to care more about other peoples education than yours. Maybe you should stop being a butthurt fucking faggot and enjoy your course
>>7732770
Are you dumb? That's a first year maths course for autists who have already studied introductory college level maths. If you fail that you don't fail university, you get moved to a regular smart people math course
>>7732758
>Now imagine four times that difference every year because there are 8 courses, multiplied by four for every year of the degree, multiplied by being surrounded by smarter people rather than the dumb normies who got shit school grades.
Or, you know, they go fast because they assume most of the students have already seen most the material in calculus before enrolling in it.
>You get topics filled with people talking about their grades in Calc 1 and Calc 2
Only retarded CS majors brag about their grades in Calc or think it's a weed out course.
for engineering as long as it's ABET accredited there's literally no reason to do you undergrad at an expensive, out of state place
it's the information age you fucknut, the quality of your education now depends almost entirely on what YOU put into it
>>7732758
I'm not going to argue that there's not a difference in quality, but that the education someone ends up receiving depends on the person far more than the university.
I went to the University of Alabama for 2 years, which is on no one's radar at all for anything but football. Almost all of my friends there have gone on to graduate school at pretty impressive programs. Oxford, UMich, UPenn, and Berkeley are a few off of the top of my head. There are two researchers there who, if you work with, you basically have your pick of graduate school.
My point is that people at most colleges haves the opportunity to distinguish themselves.
Well, in germany the Universities have to proof their curriculum and all that permanently to get their accreditation. The only thing that really differs are the environment + libraries + research opportunities (if someone is interested in that). We got two kind of 'Hochschulen'. The one is a regular University, the other one is University of Applied Science. And somewhere between are the private institutions which are utter shit. The public, free (!) Universities and Universities of Applied Science just gotta have a standard. As soon they do not have this, they won't get any money from the gov basically.
Whereas the private "Universities/schools" mostly called 'Business School' and such are utter degree mills. You pay for these a few hundred bucks a month and are somewhat guaranteed to get a degree. Thus, these kinds of degrees do have a bad reputation and the kids won't learn shit.
A real, normal student REALLY in germany have to struggle to get a degree. Mostly based on their program but MINT (what's basically your STEM) are standardised and you know people who go through this hell know their shit, mostly.
We do not have grade curves, most exam problems are not from the homework, no hand-holding from the Professors, no multiple-choice, and no midterm or grade valued homework.
Most homework are just rated as a requirement to be able to write the exam. If you got this, we just got one final exam and that's 100% of our grade.
I would say it's here a lot harder than in most programs in other countries of the world. Especially of the likes like SEA.
Feel free to comment on that.
I went to an above average state school (Stony Brook) and I needed to have taken Calc 3 to take a Physics course the next semester.. I took calc 3 at a local community college over the summer so I would be able to take the physics course.
I learned so little in that calc 3 course that I nearly failed the physics course. It was about half infinite series (which is calc 2 in most places)
>>7732758
Math = irrelevant autism
therefore, doesn't matter in rigor math courses b/c still engineer either way
>>7732758
What exactly are you angry about ? Inequality of teaching quality ? Grade inflation ? Uni rankings ?
>>7732770
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_55
>mfw be naive math student in differential equations
>ask professor for advice on how to become a good mathematician
>tells me to get Advanced Calculus book by Loomis and Sternberg, and if I can work through that I would be in good shape
>get the book, open it up for the first time
>pic related
>>7732915
This is pretty much every university in Europe
I despise the murican "private" universities where you pay debt for the rest of your life and get "advanced" courses which you "can't get anywhere else".
>>7732770
math 55 is the hardest class anywhere, it's literally for insane gods
If you fail it you get moved to the highest level harvard freshman class that isn't for Tao-tier people
you're retarded
>>7732770
>In addition to these professors, past students of Math 55 include Bill Gates[12] and Richard Stallman.[4]
He passed, right?
>>7733271
>le math 55 is hard
Americans are pretty dumb if they consider an average French intro class for math majors as "hard." Math 55 is actually a running joke here. This is why I never take /sci/ seriously
>>7732770
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Math_55
I've never heard about this but the mere fact that there's a single math course that everyone reveres shows how shit the US university system must be in general. Very high-level maths are the norm in Europe if you study maths, physics or even engineering, especially in France. (t. belgian)
>>7733569
But my US engineering degree lets me work in more countries without doing any math, and most of that math is completely useless.
>>7733571
My degree lets me work anywhere in the world I want. And unlike US rockets, Ariane ones haven't blown up for 14 years so it seems not being shit at math kinda helps.
> Caltech does proofs etc on day one
The university where I did my undergrad in shithole nowhere northern Canada also did this. I went to a couple of highly rated graduate schools, taught undergrad courses at those and one other... and have concluded that the courses are pretty much the same everywhere. The cover the same material, and the quality of course design and instruction are similar. If anything, you get better quality teaching at smaller schools because the class sizes are so much smaller, and you get more chance to get in on research projects. I wouldn't go to grad school at such a place, but going to a highly rated school for your undergrad studies is not worth it.
>>7732758
>Places like MIT do Calc 1 to 3 in two courses any way
Okay. So does every college.
Literally stopped reading there because I assume OP is ignorant.
>>7732758
we're in the same boat my friend (except my school is probably not nearly in top 100-150 worldwide), but i just hope that
>only grad school matters
is true to at least some extent
>>7732758
God fucking dammit anon, just let me get my shitty state-school degree in peace so I can go somewhere decent. Fuck, you people aren't happy until I cry myself to sleep every night.
>>7733569
>I've never heard about this but the mere fact that there's a single math course that everyone reveres
>everyone reveres
They don't. It's a meme that pops up every few years when a journalist calls attention to it.
>>7733569
Fucking Eurotrash arrogance never ceases to impress. Eat shit, commie.
