Re: [Phys-l] failure is always an option

[John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>]

On 05/10/2008 11:15 AM, Michael Edmiston wrote:

> Success in our science programs most closely correlates with class rank .....
[snip]
> I can tell you that on average we like to see a student who is in the top 
> 10% of her high-school class, and has a composite ACT score of 27 or higher, 
> and fairly consistent performance across the four ACT areas.  If a person 
> has an ACT score of 30, and a GPA of 3.75, but has class rank below roughly 
> 80%, there is a good chance he is bright but not very motivated.  Some like 
> this will rise to the challenge of college.  But many, when the going gets 
> rough, drop out or at least seek a less demanding major.  

How do we understand the numbers at
  http://members.ucan-network.org/bluffton

which include:
   Middle 50% ACT Range For Freshman Class
      English       18-25
      Mathematics   18-25
      Reading       17-25
      Science       19-23

   Average High School GPA of Freshman Class: 3.32

Is it as simple as saying that the science programs are very much more
"demanding" than the other majors?


=======================================

On a separate note, I hypothesize that what works (i.e. "correlates") at 
one school might not work at another.

Just to get the conversation started, I note that Bluffton recruits from
in-state (90%).  Meanwhile, just down the road, Kenyon and Oberlin recruit
from out-of-state (80 to 90%) ... which means a different and vastly more
disparate set of feeder schools.  As Marty W has pointed out, comparing
class rank from one school to another doesn't mean much if the schools are
dissimilar.

========================================

Also, at some point we need to clarify what is meant by "success".  If
all it means is good class rank, then it seems entirely plausible that
the behaviors that led to good class rank in HS will lead to good class
rank in college.  But one could argue that by that measure, the first
step toward "success" would be to transfer out of the science program
into "a less demanding major".

When I look at a transcript, I hardly even look at GPA or class rank.
I want to see what courses were taken.  If somebody got a "C" in
algebra I, a "B" in geometry, and an "A" in AP calculus C, I figure
they must have been more interested in learning than in grubbing 
for grades.  Similarly I want to know whether they took music
theory (Aldwell & Schachter) or music appreciation (how to play
the radio).


==================================================

Reminder:  I always rail against paying too much attention to grades, 
but only because students and teachers put waaay too much stock in
grades.  I would also rail against SAT scores, but it is PC for
everybody to do that, so I don't need to carry that load.

I've known too many reeeeally smart people who had lousy grades
and/or lousy test scores.  I don't know what those things measure,
but whatever it is, it isn't what I'm looking for.