u/baysianinference

Literally everyone I know from China who applied to grad school here in the US got an 800Q on the old GRE, even people who didn’t have amazing math grades in school. It’s a well known bit that every Asian person maxes the GRE quant. Is Chinese cram school drilling so good that it breaks all praffe resistance barriers?

No he wasn’t

AGI will beat all of our CORE scores in a moment so why bother

I'm interested in mathematical physics, soft matter, CMT, biological physics - learning theoretical over experimental/applied but not like pure hardcore theory you know

Sonion you don't. Like literally if you think you have some sort of redeeming quality, by all means apply and hope for a miracle (but don't get a fat head around expectations lol).

That being said, colleges are a business. They're not tryna bring down their medians/averages/admitted ranges/whatever. You have to be hooked or really exceptional in some other way for them to make that compromise and most people are not.

(It's also worse for you if you come from a large hyper competitive but not feeder type school, I've observed there's much less variation among those by doomscrolling too many district scattergrams and UC database dashboards...)

Anyway, at the same time AOs are not like some evil entities sitting around excitedly looking forward to intentionally crush the hopes and dreams of 17 year olds. If they think you cannot succeed point blank (i.e. you have low GPA, test scores, rigor) there is no point of an acceptance.

Then ok, even if you on paper are "qualified" and can certainly handle it, there has to be differentiation between the 50000 people who "can" handle it and often the first step is discerning between the 3.5s and 3.9s.

Yes it's unfair that you're cooked that you can't get into your dream school with <10% acceptance rate because you faced xyz extenuating circumstance. But if colleges see little evidence of academic success from you, I know it sucks but they will not care if you have ADHD or a bad family life or medical issues (coming from someone who did face those things).

If they see zero concrete evidence that it is probable you'll succeed there, they are probably not going to admit you even if you're a FGLI URM chronically ill orphan from Appalachia. It's about risk and reward. At a certain level they will be more forgiving yes, but some people truly just exhaust all margin for error.

"Oh but I had an upward trend and all these good ECs/awards/essays/test scores/hard classes" Ok but many people have those things, equally good or better later performance, AND they were consistent early on. In selective admissions this kind of thing does matter. They have to eliminate people somehow. And unless those ECs and awards and hard classes are truly super super cracked and unique, there just isn't much of a point.

Again, by all means if you made USAMO and USAPhO and ISEF and RSI and started a business with $67000000 profit and have a 1600 SAT and got an A in graduate real analysis and 4.0 junior year apply to those T20 schools even if your cumulative GPA is 3.4 for whatever reason. Maybe you were just slacking or there was a legitimate one.

But, and maybe this is just going to high school in the Bay while being a bum making me extremely cynical, if you're just a generic 1520 SAT kid who took 10 APs, joined an NPO, did some research and debate, don't have any particularly impressive awards or distinctions, are coming from a well resourced area, had a bit of an upward trend......no your 3.5 is not going to be overlooked by a T20 with 8% acceptance rate. Holistic admissions doesn't mean you have a >2% chance, it just means you won't immediately get filtered out and told to not apply.

And this is as much directed to my past self as everyone else on here asking how to get into an Ivy with a low GPA and no test scores or good ECs or hooks!! Lol! Going to your safety or CC or a lower range target is not the end of the world and it is a perfectly normal outcome!! I mean bro still apply to reaches but don't cry if you don't get in.

These admissions are becoming more and more thresholdy and there is a pretty big gap between what most "likely" schools need and what even moderately prestigious ones do. If you aren't above average you will probably not get into an above average (in terms of prestige/selectivity) school, however tf you define that.

And I am NOT talking about people who did have a 4.0 and 1550 SAT but got screwed over by an unfair holistic process. I'm speaking to the people who don't or just barely cross a certain threshold but still have all these expectations.

Genuinely why not applied math, CS, EE, applied physics, or whatever lol just take relevant electives and farm comp neuro research exp or something

Curious because starting in middle school, then all throughout high school, my parents didn't let me take the AMCs because they thought I didn't have that dawg in me to practice enough and would get a 0 on everything or sumn

But then my friends were always saying to me that AIME qual is never that serious 🥀

Guys I got a B+ in a random gened ;-; :((((((((((((( I wanted go to UC Berkeley but is my only option now to transfer to the nearby McDonalds?????? 😒😒😒😒😒😒😒😒

Why is everyone trying to cram Desmos regression tricks and convoluted ERW mental flowcharts instead of just... knowing how math and grammar work?

Like yeah these tips and tricks save time once you mostly know what you're doing, but they're not useful if you literally don't understand how commas or linear functions work 😭😭

"Mannnnn they're patching the methods" ??????????? Bro

If you're getting sub 13XX...........you just need to get better at taking tests and/or get better at actually knowing the content instead of trying to game your way through

Whenever people ask me what I'm planning on studying, if I say biology or biophysics they think I mean I want to go into medicine. And if I just say physics the assumption tends to be astro (or particles?).

For an area like physics where prestige kinda matters (more than, say, bio or chem IME?) but it isn't like academic econ or ML or something (not interested in HEP-th or strings or whatever)-

Would it be better to attend a mid tier R1 such as UCSC (not interested in astro either lol) or something for 4 years to have access to more rigorous courses and denser research opportunities (for a student that's academically accelerated and opportunistic) from day 1, or attend a CCC for ~2 years and potentially get into a top school like UCSB or Berkeley with the caveat that I'd maybe only have one year at an R1 before applying to grad school?

For those who don't know, the California community college transfer rate for the prestigious UCs is much higher.

Yes I know 1 year transfer is possible but physics course sequencing is quite annoying and clunky. And yes I know it's still possible to transfer from a 4 year college, seems a bit risky either way. As a 1 year I'd also apply broadly to other ~T30s I think would be a good fit or whatever either way; I'd have a decent amount of college credits with hopefully a high GPA in rigorous coursework, mid but not terrible HS GPA (like 3.6X?), 15XX SAT, and domestic full pay.

Gap year or postbacc isn't the end of the world but still, should I just take whatever decent R1 I can get if I think there's a good chance I will try to pursue a PhD program?

And yes I know R1 =/= guaranteed freshman/sophomore research and CC =/= no research opportunities, but an R1 may still be structurally optimal.

Like I know the "93% from CCC" statistic or whatever but more CCC students apply overall and UC to UC is 2nd priority right? If any of you have any experience or knowledge, how hard would it be to transfer from a lower tier UC to UC Berkeley, UCLA, UCSB, UCSD for a non impacted STEM major like physics or math?

There's like no other available slot for me to take this linear algebra class but the RMP (Concha Gómez) says this class is super impossible 😭😭😭🫩🫩🫩🥀🥀 Any tips or prayers? Just keep my finger on the Withdraw button? 🫩🫩🥀🥀🥀

Tbh, even if I was at Stanford I'd probably still end up kind of broke compared to an engineer or smth... but how much does it realistically matter in grad school and therefore postdoc/j*b opportunities?