Yes.
If you really want insane bonus points to entering universities: be a full blood native american. Even more points than blacks.
Chuckrox8 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mo34 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > Is it harder for Asian/Indian students to get into > American bschools than for white males? Humm … Is this a trick question ?
You can claim American Indian status if you are 1/8 (or maybe 1/16? I forget). I definitely know people who took advantage of that…
Chuckrox8 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mo34 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If he’s White, probably a 50-50 chance with > this > > garbage GPA. > > > > If he’s Black or Hispanic, then probably 80-90% > > probability. > > > > If he’s Indian or Chinese, no way. > > Is it harder for Asian/Indian students to get into > American bschools than for white males? i think so for the international asian/indians, they’re competing against that many more people from their countries. from my take, on a raw intelligence level, i’d say the internationals are superior to domestics. spoke to one guy and he told me pretty much everyone from his country that got in had full marks in university and at least a 730 gmat.
i can has cheezburger?
Why did the person in question switched major from math to cs to econ?
comp_sci_kid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why did the person in question switched major from > math to cs to econ? I noticed the trend as well. Not a good sign from an admission officer perspective. From hard to easier to easier , what’s next, art history ?
mo34 Wrote: -------------------------------------------------------> > I noticed the trend as well. Not a good sign from > an admission officer perspective. > > From hard to easier to easier , what’s next, art > history ? Oh my friend mo34, Although it has been a decade since I majored in Econ, the fact that I majored in econ will not change. So I am bit sensitive to this matter. I know it’s relative term, but since when Econ got easier? Is your opinion based on CFA Econ portion of curriculum? If that’s the case then I can tell you that your opinion is biased to easy side of Econ. I am not saying it’s though major, but it not a cake either. Anyways, more bright people are majoring in Econ than CS. Here are some evidence. Rank of LSAT scores by major. 1. Physics/math 2. Philosophy/ Religion 3. Econ … 14. Computer Science. The performances are very consistent for more than 10 years. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1430654 http://www.uic.edu/cba/cba-depts/economics/undergrad/table.htm
skycfa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I know it’s relative term, but since when Econ got > easier? Being a business undergrad major myself, I found that people who switched/dropped into Econ/Business were typically of much lower caliber than those that stuck with it from the beginning. Fact is that these subjects are relatively easy to graduate compared to subjects like engineering/CS, where if you fall behind, it’ll get worse over time. The best in both fields are still forces to be reckoned with, but it’s hard to fail out of econ/business. In regards to the “more bright people are majoring in Econ”, I think that really depends on what school you went to. Places like Harvard have a large portion of their students majoring in economics and it is considered one of the best majors. In other schools, econ is the ugly younger brother of business. That being said, LSAT scores? Why not use MCAT while you’re at it?
I can’t speak for other universities, but at my school, economics is far easier than CS or most engineering majors. I switched to Econ from engineering so I could graduate early.
I think foreign students GPA aren’t comparable directly. Top engineering colleges in India has a screwed up grading approach called “relative grading” in which the grades of whole class depends on topper. Well, it looks good on theory. But if there are some really nerdy people in your class, then your life is totally hell, one guy can screw the GPA of whole class. So it’s common to see a non uniform distribution of grades in EE & CS, because they attract really nerdy people who live in classrooms and libraries only. In those departments, while max 5% of class may have awesome grades, rest 95% of class has pathetic grades, in same colleges relative grading is a boon in lesser competitive departments such as geology where the whole class is more relaxed and less nerdy, average GPA of such departments are awesome not because they study more but because they study less. I think adcoms know this and they take the competitiveness of program in consideration while comparing the GPAs. Really, minimum effort you are required to put in to score an A in some geology class won’t even fetch you a C in EE, that’s what the shit called relative grading is. Same is the differential in the topmost and relatively lower ranked college but same major, totally screwed up.
^ Moreover, Indian schools are very conservative in grading, top grade means something extraordinary in some colleges, so in many courses you won’t see even a single guy scoring an A, while the topper’s performance might be really good, but not upto the mark. That’s why scoring a perfect GPA is not a big deal for Indian students from top colleges in US univs, not because they are they are genius or something like that, but simply because of the kind of torture they have experienced here.
MCalamari Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Being a business undergrad major myself, I found > that people who switched/dropped into > Econ/Business were typically of much lower caliber > than those that stuck with it from the beginning. > Fact is that these subjects are relatively easy to > graduate compared to subjects like engineering/CS, > where if you fall behind, it’ll get worse over > time. The best in both fields are still forces to > be reckoned with, but it’s hard to fail out of > econ/business. I see your point and concede with you that it is relatively easy to graduate with less work. You can cherry pick all the easy courses and graduate, but if the relative term is about intellectual challenge then it’s going to be a different discussion. > In regards to the “more bright people are majoring > in Econ”, I think that really depends on what > school you went to. Places like Harvard have a > large portion of their students majoring in > economics and it is considered one of the best > majors. In other schools, econ is the ugly younger > brother of business. I can’t agree with you on this one. School matters for any major. Econ is the ugly YOUNGER brother of business? I majored in economics and minored in business management. Most of the core business courses are about practical knowledge; it doesn’t go near the intellectually challenging level of some Econ courses. Despite some people might think, economics is more of a mathematical disciple than liberal arts. >LSAT scores? > Why not use MCAT while you’re at it? LSAT is open to every major, and the score is correlated to intelligence and does NOT test your educated knowledge. FYI. I did not just brought up LSAT out of nowhere. I took the LSAT so I know what the test is about. For MCAT, you won’t get much different constituent. You have to major in biology or there are some courses that you must take to go to medical school. And also, test itself asks about specific medical related knowledge. Let me ask this now. MCAT? Why not use GMAT? It could have been a better argument.
skycfa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Let me ask this now. > MCAT? Why not use GMAT? It could have been a > better argument. MCAT was meant to be a joke… of course GMAT/GRE would be more appropriate to the situation at hand, since that’s what MBA and MFE programs accept. The point was that statistics about LSAT is inappropriate in the context of the OP. In regards to the relationship of econ and business (finance) courses, I realize the differences in high level courses, but business departments have a tendency to dominate economics departments by taking credit for their work, paying more for famous professors, and generally marketing the hell out of themselves to attract [better] students. In some schools, business as an undergrad major doesn’t even exist, so economics reigns. I’m not 100% sure of UCLA, but I know that similar large universities with a prestigious business school tend to have stricter entrance requirements for business students than econ students. Keep in mind that we’re not talking about the cream of the crop, the OP talked about a 2.2 GPA…
Chuckrox8 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mo34 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If he’s White, probably a 50-50 chance with > this > > garbage GPA. > > > > If he’s Black or Hispanic, then probably 80-90% > > probability. > > > > If he’s Indian or Chinese, no way. > > Is it harder for Asian/Indian students to get into > American bschools than for white males? Absolutely. They have quota for international students.
My boy would like to thank everyone for their thoughtful responses. Maybe he has a better shot at a top part-time program?
The 2.2 GPA totally kills it, I doubt any of the top 10 will take him.
Chuckrox8 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If work Ex is 10+ years that’s a huge plus. > Adcoms are not going to care about the CFP > courses. A 760 GMAT is a stellar score, obviously > this guy/you is very smart albeit potentially lazy > from a GPA standpoint even though CS is hard as > sh!t, I’ve been there. Some b schools weight the > final 2 years of UG much more heavily than the > first two. If the GPA trend is positive, which it > sounds like it is, then that will also be a plus. > > > Chances for a Top 10 are going to be low unless > this person has some outstanding extracurriculars. > Chances at a 10-20 ranked school should be pretty > decent. The only deal breaker is going to be the > GPA. 10+ years of exp is actually a huge ding. he should be trying EMBA programs instead (if in fact he has 10+ years)… At this point, it really comes down to the intangibles… i.e., articulate the points about why the mba now, and why this particular school. I’m actually going through the process now (applied in rd1 to Stanford/Wharton/Chicago) so I’ve done a lot of research on the application process.
That low of a GPA absolutely does not eliminate anyone from admission. Especially 10 years out of UG. A good rule is that the longer you are removed from UG the less relevant the GPA is, especially at schools who trend higher in average age (ie, not Stanford or HBS). Go for it!