Mathematics, reading skills in unprecedented decline in teenagers

[IIVI]

At the end of the day, overall with these schools (the ultra top) it's not about your potential but what you can actually show and prove.

No doubt some people have faked resumes before, but I think especially at the very top like Caltech and M.I.T, they tend to flush these out. If it happens, its' once-in-a-blue moon they get scammed. Like the person in that youtube video has multiple science camps she got invited to and attended.

As I pointed out a couple posts ago, a lot of the kids who get accepted straight out of high school already have a proven rep amongst many professionals as to how legit they are. You can even see on youtube other people who got accepted into Caltech and M.I.T already have lab and research work done with other professors at other schools.

I think if somebody wants the best shot no matter their background, they need to attend as many of those as possible in addition to taking advanced courses, scoring high, etc.

That's basically what this person did, as a high schooler she went to Texas Tech and got a paid research program with professors there where they additionally got published:

Here are her accolades, which are insane as well. Way more STEM extracurriculars for Mechanical Engineering as a high schooler working for the government with security clearance:

Stuff like that looks great for these applications. It's funny because after this person got accepted into both Caltech and M.I.T, she chose USC. It really shows how much the bar is raising overall.

This post made me realize why some of the people in my Engineering courses can't get internships as these companies are using these High Schoolers to do that now. High Schoolers working on high-security clearance projects is wild, some shyt right out of a movie.

That's an insight here as well: overall I think that's where the community can come into play. Anybody working a STEM role can also do what they can to help these kids out while they're in high school.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

At the end of the day, overall with these schools (the ultra top) it's not about your potential but what you can actually show and prove.

You've just killed the rationale for prioritizing standardized test scores.

No doubt some people have faked resumes before, but I think especially at the very top like Caltech and M.I.T, they tend to flush these out. If it happens, its' once-in-a-blue moon they get scammed. Like the person in that youtube video has multiple science camps she got invited to and attended.

I don't think you got the point. It's not about whether the people with fake resumes get caught or not, it's the fact that when they do get in, they often succeed. Because the criteria and bar for what it takes to get into an elite school is not the same as what it takes to succeed there.

As I pointed out a couple posts ago, a lot of the kids who get accepted straight out of high school already have a proven rep amongst many professionals as to how legit they are. You can even see on youtube other people who got accepted into Caltech and M.I.T already have lab and research work done with other professors at other schools.

I think if somebody wants the best shot no matter their background, they need to attend as many of those as possible in addition to taking advanced courses, scoring high, etc.

lol at that suggestion - when I was in high school I didn't even know things like research work in high school and major science competitions EXISTED, much less know how to apply for and compete in them. Unless you are part of a major city public school system, the privilege gap for getting into that sort of shyt is even larger than the privilege gap for grades and scores.

And how are they going to take advanced courses if they go to schools where such courses don't even exist?

 

[ThrobbingHood]

You got to blame the parents for giving small children phones and tablets to keep them quiet instead of giving them activities that they can use their imaginations and build critical thinking. Also parents should be reading to their kids before they are old enough to start talking.

Yup. Albeit, I grew up just before cellphones really took off by the time I was a teenager, watching my parents read and having them instil that activity in me was vital.

Schools can only do so much but parents have to do a lot more heavy lifting. Rather than treating teachers like glorified babysitters.

 

[IIVI]

You've just killed the rationale for prioritizing standardized test scores.

I don't think you got the point. It's not about whether the people with fake resumes get caught or not, it's the fact that when they do get in, they often succeed. Because the criteria and bar for what it takes to get into an elite school is not the same as what it takes to succeed there.

lol at that suggestion - when I was in high school I didn't even know things like research work in high school and major science competitions EXISTED, much less know how to apply for and compete in them. Unless you are part of a major city public school system, the privilege gap for getting into that sort of shyt is even larger than the privilege gap for grades and scores.

And how are they going to take advanced courses if they go to schools where such courses don't even exist?

1. I think many schools are test-optional aren't they? I only think there are only a handful of schools that are test-mandatory now the last few years. I know M.I.T just went test-mandatory recently though.

2. My point was that most high schoolers who are already doing extracurriculars like research, interning, attending and making a name for themselves at STEM programs, acing advanced math courses at college, etc. are usually the profile of the students these schools want. The more someone can do that and have working professionals vouch for them, the better chances they can have to get accepted into these elite STEM schools.

3. I think now with the internet, these things are now more well-known. People simply need to actually go out there and do it now, which yes, is the hard part and not everyone is capable of it (which is why so few people are of that level). A lot of explanations on Youtube and everywhere else of the expectations, that's the reality of it. These kids or their parents should know now. These are videos from a few years ago already with a lot of views so I'm sure word of mouth has got around at this point. I think that's why it's so critical for parents to handle their business to get their kids set up and why I compared it to the NBA/nepotism.

4. These advanced courses are usually not offered in high school. That's what all three of those people in those videos took these courses at a college while they were in high school. They maxed out their schools' Calculus class in Freshman/Sophomore year and took the rest at a University. Most high schools often don't offer past Calc 1, and in that case you most likely want a Professor teaching anything beyond that anyways (although learning would most likely come from the person themselves like those people self-taught years ahead and/or had STEM parents to show them). Plus at this point, I don't think many Universities would look at some kid taking Calc 2+ at a high school as anything special vs if they took it at a University or Community College by an actual professor.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

1. I think many schools are test-optional aren't they? I only think there are only a handful of schools that are test-mandatory now the last few years. I know M.I.T just went test-mandatory recently though.

Caltech, MIT, Stanford, John Hopkins, and nearly all of the Ivies are still test mandatory, as are a lot of colleges in the next tier too. Even for the "test optional" schools, I'm not sure how much of a penalty students face who choose not to take the tests or who score at a lower level than their better-prepared peers.

2. My point was that most high schoolers who are already doing extracurriculars like research, interning, attending and making a name for themselves at STEM programs, acing advanced math courses at college, etc. are usually the profile of the students these schools want. The more someone can do that and have working professionals vouch for them, the better chances they can have to get accepted into these elite STEM schools.

I understood that that was your point, I was pointing out the inherent unfairness of that situation.

3. I think now with the internet, these things are now more well-known. People simply need to actually go out there and do it now. A lot of explanations on Youtube and everywhere else. These kids or their parents should know now. These are videos from a few years ago already with a lot of views so I'm sure word of mouth has got around at this point. I think that's why it's so critical for parents to handle their business to get their kids set up and why I compared it to the NBA/nepotism.

Most parents aren't remotely in a position to know those things. Both of my parents had a college degree and yet neither of them knew anything about that stuff, nor would they know now even with the advent of the internet. The entirely of my parental assistance with my college applications was my mom driving me to interviews and my dad giving me bad advice on what to write my essay on. It wasn't just that they didn't know what to help me on, they didn't even know that they were supposed to help me. Both of them had gone to lower-level state schools where you basically just filled out an application and showed up. They figured that I was the smart one and I would handle my own business.

Even if they had known that I should do internships and science competitions....how would they help me get the slots? Who they hell would coach me on the science competition when none of my teachers were qualified to do it and no one else I knew was doing it? Who would hire me for an internship when I had zero connections with any companies (the vast majority of those internship hires are built through connections), not to mention that I lacked transportation to get there?

That's true for the vast majority of urban kids, the vast majority of rural kids, and the vast majority of Black-Brown kids.

4. These advanced courses are usually not offered in high school. That's what all three of those people in those videos took these courses at a college while they were in high school. They maxed out their schools' Calculus class in Freshman/Sophomore year and took the rest at a University. Most high schools often don't offer past Calc 1, and in that case you most likely want a Professor teaching anything beyond that anyways (although learning would most likely come from the person themselves like those people self-taught years ahead or had STEM parents to show them). Plus at this point, I don't think many Universities would look at some kid taking Calc 2+ at a high school as anything special vs if they took it at a University or Community College by an actual professor.

Breh, it was IMPOSSIBLE for me to take calculus or physics before my senior year in high school, our school had no advanced students on any accelerated track, so how would I even qualify for those advanced college courses? You listed like a dozen AP courses she took, my school only offered 1 and no one in the history of my school had ever scored a 5 on it because the teacher was mid. Not to mention that I didn't have transportation to get to a college any more than I had transportation to get to an internship.

You're talking about people taking calculus in freshman/sophomore year, how the hell does the average poor kid, black kid, brown kid do that when their middle school doesn't offer anything past algebra? It is HARD to make that shyt happen, especially if you don't have parental support or knowledge.

 

[IIVI]

Caltech, MIT, Stanford, John Hopkins, and nearly all of the Ivies are still test mandatory, as are a lot of colleges in the next tier too. Even for the "test optional" schools, I'm not sure how much of a penalty students face who choose not to take the tests or who score at a lower level than their better-prepared peers.

I understood that that was your point, I was pointing out the inherent unfairness of that situation.

Most parents aren't remotely in a position to know those things. Both of my parents had a college degree and yet neither of them knew anything about that stuff, nor would they know now even with the advent of the internet. The entirely of my parental assistance with my college applications was my mom driving me to interviews and my dad giving me bad advice on what to write my essay on. It wasn't just that they didn't know what to help me on, they didn't even know that they were supposed to help me. Both of them had gone to lower-level state schools where you basically just filled out an application and showed up. They figured that I was the smart one and I would handle my own business.

Even if they had known that I should do internships and science competitions....how would they help me get the slots? Who they hell would coach me on the science competition when none of my teachers were qualified to do it and no one else I knew was doing it? Who would hire me for an internship when I had zero connections with any companies (the vast majority of those internship hires are built through connections), not to mention that I lacked transportation to get there?

That's true for the vast majority of urban kids, the vast majority of rural kids, and the vast majority of Black-Brown kids.

Breh, it was IMPOSSIBLE for me to take calculus or physics before my senior year in high school, our school had no advanced students on any accelerated track, so how would I even qualify for those advanced college courses? You listed like a dozen AP courses she took, my school only offered 1 and no one in the history of my school had ever scored a 5 on it because the teacher was mid. Not to mention that I didn't have transportation to get to a college any more than I had transportation to get to an internship.

You're talking about people taking calculus in freshman/sophomore year, how the hell does the average poor kid, black kid, brown kid do that when their middle school doesn't offer anything past algebra? It is HARD to make that shyt happen, especially if you don't have parental support or knowledge.

Breh, I'm actually agreeing with you for the most part. It's why I said how bad the situation is and compared it to the nepotism of the NBA. It's not a direct 1:1 comparison but not too far off either as people are in a way getting priced out from education.

The reality is poor kids from lesser/mid parents are basically crashing out as kids from smarter parents are excelling. It's a big time concern and is not a new problem, but it's getting worse because it's an exponential problem where falling behind a little now sets up for falling behind enormously later for their kids. For the most part: smart people get with other smart people, then have smart kids and those smart kids make good decisions to have more smart kids (and resources).

The other side of the coin: people give in to their vices, choose the wrong people, make dumb decisions, etc. That's not the whole picture as there is room for variation and edge cases of course, but for the most part, that logic will persist and has.

How do you fix it is the million dollar question. High level: definitely need better leadership in government who'll care about fostering a better education system. We see how government can absolutely tank education for those who can't afford good education nor have good educated parents. Hopefully they get these schools acting better. That's the barebones: need reliable leadership in office. Poor people are screwed if this is not in place.

Long text, so I'll spoiler to save room:
From there, parents need to do their part in many ways: surrounding their kids around a better culture is one thing that goes a long way.

Spoiler: Providing for their kids especially in one or more of these ways (not an exhaustive list) is another:

1. The most ideal is: Someone and/or their partner are basically a professional in STEM and can teach their kids themselves (more than any elementary school teacher can). This is basically what those girls and Youtubers all have. That's the cheapest option. They'd also be in the industry and know of programs their peers put their kids through. All Engineers and Physics/Math Majors have at least taken Physics 2 and Differential Equations at their school and have solved a ton of problems. Those are techniques passable and what most elementary teachers don't know much about. Amy Wang (Youtuber I mentioned who 4.0'd Caltech's Chemical Engineering program) talks about how her dad coached her up to solve crazy Math problems when she was younger as he helped her with her homework and gave her insights.

2. Not as ideal because there's probably a significant investment in time for yourself first that the first group already taken the time to do: If a parent has the time and energy, but not the background they can try to learn as much as they can about these courses and help their kids. It may not be as good as #1, but it's probably tied with next best option along with the next.

3. You can hire a tutor to teach your kids (more expensive financially). Hopefully they'd be able to do the same thing as the person in example 1.

4. You can put your kids through a private school (most expensive).

From there if they have a good foundation, and can get into some good schools and step into good professions if their grades are up. This can help raise the floor as a whole, then they can meet someone smart later on in life and raise a good kid and finally have some resources.

Spoiler: Now for the ceiling (like those Caltech and M.I.T girls I shared):

My honest opinion: I don't think you can get to that point of elite levels without either stupid luck or a lot of evolution: a lot of generations of smart breeding, consistency and some luck (one of those smart kids don't make a really dumb decision). Speaking realistically, that's where I honestly say some kids are definitely built for that and have a lineage of it more than others (why when two smart parents come together a smart kid is a more probable outcome).

The way these kids handle their schedule when it gets stacked like that with all the traveling but then they balance school/University (at 15), science camps, clubs, math and science competitions, music competitions, sports competitions (another one of these Caltech youtuber girls was also a national power lifter, has a really popular instagram account dedicated to her Cockatiels and is a Physics major), volunteer work, interning for the government, etc. That's just honestly not how most people are built. Those people who get accepted into undergrad at these schools for the most part are closer to legendary than normal.

I can tell you outside of 1 person I know (my cousin's kid got accepted to M.I.T and they got 1st place by themselves for some Physics/Engineering research/project), I don't know anybody else personally who can do all that (and I work with some pretty intelligent people), much less at 16. I showed that to some other smart people I know and they just shook their head and joked that if they ever hired someone like that they'd put them in another department to not make themselves look bad. It's funny because many companies actually do something similar: hire those people and have them work on BS so competitors don't hire them and work against them:


I posted that back in the Tech Layoffs thread, I know Rona Wang graduated from M.I.T so if her friend she's talking about did as well, what that person said who replied to her wouldn't surprise me if that was the case. I honestly think that's what happened to Amy Wang as well (and she made a video about it) and why she went and does the youtube route full-time. That's also why I said at the start of my other post while the tech industry got eviscerated people like the original video I posted were getting hired with big paydays.

So that's something to keep in mind, those girls are edge cases (and speaks to the level of talent). However, in order for a child to get there I do think a lot of floors need to be raised for generations. That floor raising however, is occurring right now with other families while other families continue to trend toward clout chasing and that's the concerning part.

 

[The Fade]

Yup. It's not one or the other: school or parents holding 100% responsibility.

Truth is it's probably like 20% school 80% parents.

You can't simply let your kids get taught by strangers (teachers) and expect them to excel. Teachers see new sets of kids every year, can't expect them to do their job to maximum passion and capacity every time if they're being paid peanuts.

Like I said before, you can't expect your kid to know Calculus if the highest Math classes their teachers learned themselves was Algebra II. How do you expect them to have any kind of intrigue or capacity for Math is their parents and teachers are all bad at it?

If you're not going to have the time to teach them, then you better be sending them to a really good private school.

Yup true learning is done at home or out in the field, not in the classroom. The environment matters. They need a environment that nurtures and fosters growth

 

[GoFlipAPack]

We walk around with calculators and devices that we can verbally request whatever we want in our pockets. Pretty confident that has an impact.

What you mean we can verbally request whatever we want in our pockets?

*googles what that might mean*

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Breh, I'm actually agreeing with you for the most part. It's why I said how bad the situation is and compared it to the nepotism of the NBA. It's not a direct 1:1 comparison but not too far off either as people are in a way getting priced out from education.

The reality is poor kids from lesser/mid parents are basically crashing out as kids from smarter parents are excelling. It's a big time concern and is not a new problem, but it's getting worse because it's an exponential problem where falling behind a little now sets up for falling behind enormously later for their kids. For the most part: smart people get with other smart people, then have smart kids and those smart kids make good decisions to have more smart kids (and resources).

The other side of the coin: people give in to their vices, choose the wrong people, make dumb decisions, etc. That's not the whole picture as there is room for variation and edge cases of course, but for the most part, that logic will persist and has.

How do you fix it is the million dollar question. High level: definitely need better leadership in government who'll care about fostering a better education system. We see how government can absolutely tank education for those who can't afford good education nor have good educated parents. Hopefully they get these schools acting better. That's the barebones: need reliable leadership in office. Poor people are screwed if this is not in place.

Long text, so I'll spoiler to save room:
From there, parents need to do their part in many ways: surrounding their kids around a better culture is one thing that goes a long way.

Spoiler: Providing for their kids especially in one or more of these ways (not an exhaustive list) is another:

1. The most ideal is: Someone and/or their partner are basically a professional in STEM and can teach their kids themselves (more than any elementary school teacher can). This is basically what those girls and Youtubers all have. That's the cheapest option. They'd also be in the industry and know of programs their peers put their kids through. All Engineers and Physics/Math Majors have at least taken Physics 2 and Differential Equations at their school and have solved a ton of problems. Those are techniques passable and what most elementary teachers don't know much about. Amy Wang (Youtuber I mentioned who 4.0'd Caltech's Chemical Engineering program) talks about how her dad coached her up to solve crazy Math problems when she was younger as he helped her with her homework and gave her insights.

2. Not as ideal because there's probably a significant investment in time for yourself first that the first group already taken the time to do: If a parent has the time and energy, but not the background they can try to learn as much as they can about these courses and help their kids. It may not be as good as #1, but it's probably tied with next best option along with the next.

3. You can hire a tutor to teach your kids (more expensive financially). Hopefully they'd be able to do the same thing as the person in example 1.

4. You can put your kids through a private school (most expensive).

From there if they have a good foundation, and can get into some good schools and step into good professions if their grades are up. This can help raise the floor as a whole, then they can meet someone smart later on in life and raise a good kid and finally have some resources.

None of those "do you part" options are within reach for the majority of parents. Like I said, both of my parents had a college degree and they didn't do any of those things . 1 and 3 were impossible. 2 was impossible for my mom, my dad technically could have done it but with his personality there was zero chance. They MIGHT have been able to get me into a private school on scholarship, and maybe they should have done that, but that's only because I had the stats to justify it. The vast majority of kids couldn't do that and if they could it would ruin the private school profit model.

Spoiler: Now for the ceiling (like those Caltech and M.I.T girls I shared):

My honest opinion: I don't think you can get to that point of elite levels without either stupid luck or a lot of evolution: a lot of generations of smart breeding, consistency and some luck (one of those smart kids don't make a really dumb decision). Speaking realistically, that's where I honestly say some kids are definitely built for that and have a lineage of it more than others (why when two smart parents come together a smart kid is a more probable outcome).

The way these kids handle their schedule when it gets stacked like that with all the traveling but then they balance school/University (at 15), science camps, clubs, math and science competitions, music competitions, sports competitions (another one of these Caltech youtuber girls was also a national power lifter, has a really popular instagram account dedicated to her Cockatiels and is a Physics major), volunteer work, interning for the government, etc. That's just honestly not how most people are built. Those people who get accepted into undergrad at these schools for the most part are closer to legendary than normal.

I can tell you outside of 1 person I know (my cousin's kid got accepted to M.I.T and they got 1st place by themselves for some Physics/Engineering research/project), I don't know anybody else personally who can do all that (and I work with some pretty intelligent people), much less at 16. I showed that to some other smart people I know and they just shook their head and joked that if they ever hired someone like that they'd put them in another department to not make themselves look bad. It's funny because many companies actually do something similar: hire those people and have them work on BS so competitors don't hire them and work against them:


I posted that back in the Tech Layoffs thread, I know Rona Wang graduated from M.I.T so if her friend she's talking about did as well, what that person said who replied to her wouldn't surprise me if that was the case. I honestly think that's what happened to Amy Wang as well (and she made a video about it) and why she went and does the youtube route full-time. That's also why I said at the start of my other post while the tech industry got eviscerated people like the original video I posted were getting hired with big paydays.

So that's something to keep in mind, those girls are edge cases (and speaks to the level of talent). However, in order for a child to get there I do think a lot of floors need to be raised for generations. That floor raising however, is occurring right now with other families while other families continue to trend toward clout chasing and that's the concerning part.

Wait, so she did all that "elite" stuff just to become a Youtuber and a private tutor? shyt she could have done without any degree at all?

So that's proving my point. That slot could have gone to any other random student who got denied and might have done something a lot better with it. The fact that Caltech picked her cause of her "great application" over those other students didn't help her OR caltech in the end. Shows how little it means.


I'm watching one of her videos, and she talks about how she purposely chose the easiest courses in college to maintain her straight-A average. She says that she avoided classes she might have liked because they were notoriously difficult, despite the fact that she had a GPA and capabilities that should have given her more leeway to take those courses than anyone. WTF? What a worthless way to go through college, and I'm sure her resume-chasing leading to that point helped cause her to do that.

 

[IIVI]

None of those "do you part" options are within reach for the majority of parents. Like I said, both of my parents had a college degree and they didn't do any of those things . 1 and 3 were impossible. 2 was impossible for my mom, my dad technically could have done it but with his personality there was zero chance. They MIGHT have been able to get me into a private school on scholarship, and maybe they should have done that, but that's only because I had the stats to justify it. The vast majority of kids couldn't do that and if they could it would ruin the private school profit model.







Wait, so she did all that "elite" stuff just to become a Youtuber and a private tutor? shyt she could have done without any degree at all?

So that's proving my point. That slot could have gone to any other random student who got denied and might have done something a lot better with it. The fact that Caltech picked her cause of her "great application" over those other students didn't help her OR caltech in the end. Shows how little it means.


I'm watching one of her videos, and she talks about how she purposely chose the easiest courses in college to maintain her straight-A average. She says that she avoided classes she might have liked because they were notoriously difficult, despite the fact that she had a GPA and capabilities that should have given her more leeway to take those courses than anyone. WTF? What a worthless way to go through college, and I'm sure her resume-chasing leading to that point helped cause her to do that.

Your first point is the point I'm trying to make breh. I don't know what else you can do about it. That problem won't go away overnight and is actually a problem that needs to be solved overtime. At the end off the day, some people simply have more resources because people in their family got started before everyone else. That's life.

It's why I compared it to the NBA filling up with rich kids, I just don't know what else to say, but I agree with that part because most people don't have the resources to do shyt this:


That said, I know a lot of rich people and their kids are dummies who do nothing close to that either.

The second part, I disagree. She graduated with possibly the most difficult degree to get from one of the most prestigious and difficult schools in the world. Having a BS in Chemical Engineering is insane, having one from Caltech is exponentially crazier. I think the odds of making the NBA are comparable and more people make the NBA than get a CE degree from Caltech. In order to get that degree you need to take down some insane upper division courses that are quite infamous and make some really brilliant minds change majors, and she aced them.

Any kind of elective courses after that, to be quite honest a lot of students take some easier courses, that happens everywhere. However, like everyone else who got that degree, she most likely went through the unavoidable monster courses. Often times (and I know that's the case it's the case for my major EE) the upper division courses are much more difficult than the Senior Electives. Ask most EE's their hardest courses were either Semiconductor Physics/Electronics, Signals and Systems, or Electromagnetics. Those are 300-level classes while the 400-level courses are easier. Many people even know the 400's/electives are the time it gets "fun". I'm going to guess that's the same for Chemical Engineering, except those core courses are "Caltech hard".

So at the end, I don't really agree regarding downplaying anyone's credentials because that degree still says Chemical Engineering and the school still says Caltech. That degree is a monster from day 1 of Freshman year whether she took 4 or 5 breather courses over her time there because I guarantee she had courses that many working engineers around the world wouldn't be able to pass. Also, "Caltech easy" isn't really normal people easy. Additionally, I honestly think she's doing more for the school and the world than plenty other people have regarding giving out information, advice, etc. In a lot of ways, that's the essence of that school. We're also just talking about one person, there are many insane minds that have got through that school majoring in a lot of different fields and I guarantee far more have contributed to science and engineering than not. The prestige of that school and it's graduates are not to be looked at slightly like any ordinary smart person can do it.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

The second part, I disagree. I say this as someone who's about to finish an Electrical Engineering degree from a decent school (my 2nd degree). She graduated with possibly the most difficult to get from one of the most prestigious and difficult schools in the world. Having a BS in Chemical Engineering is insane, having one from Caltech is exponentially crazier. I think the odds of making the NBA are comparable, I think more people make the NBA than getting a CE degree from Caltech each year.

But like she said, she did it by being good at gaming the system. She says herself that she's not the most brilliant student, nor does she work the hardest, and she talks about a lot of Caltech students being on a completely different tier than her intellectually. But what she was extremely good at was determining exactly what she had to do to complete the A and then doing that.

In order to get that degree you need to take down some insane upper division courses that are quite infamous, and she aced them.

Any kind of elective courses after that, to be quite honest a lot of students take some easier courses, that happens everywhere. However, like everyone else who got that degree, she went through the nightmare courses. Often times (and I know that's the case to EE) the upper division courses are much harder than the Senior Electives. Ask most EE's their hardest courses were either Semiconductor Physics/Electronics, Signals and Systems or Electromagnetics and those are 300-level classes while the 400-level courses are easier. Many people even know the 400's/electives are the time it gets "fun". I'm going to guess that's the same for Chemical Engineering, except those core courses are Caltech hard and again, she aced them.

The best students I knew were taking those toughest upper-division courses AND taking the interesting upper-division courses in other subjects too, sometimes even to the point of double-majoring. I had good friends who double-majored in physics and engineering, double-majored in engineering and computer science, double-majored in physics and math with upper-division biology or computer science courses on the side. Friends who graduated with multiple units over what they needed to or who registered for EXTREMELY difficult courses in their major that weren't even required by their degree path, just to challenge themselves. My point is that students who seriously care about the shyt they're studying don't duck interesting courses just because they're afraid of getting a B. It's not like she was overworked, she straight up said that she got 8 hours of sleep a night and had a balanced life. She could have chosen to only get a B or C in some courses that she cared less about so that she had room to take those other tough courses she was really interested in. But she purposely chose to prioritize maintaining a 4.0 average over taking the courses she actually wanted to take.

Did she even give a shyt about chemical engineering, or did she just choose that major due to the reputation and the fact that she was confident in her study hacks? So far as I know she never even applied for a chemical engineering position or advanced degree, in her videos she talks about getting a job with a management consulting firm I think, and of course now she just works as a private tutor and youtuber. And her videos aren't about chemical engineering or even science, they have titles like this:

"How to get straight A's WITHOUT being smart"
"How to study MANY SUBJECTS so fast it feels ILLEGAL"
"TIME-MANAGEMENT: My secrets to achieve more in a FRACTION of the time"
"EASY A: 5 study hacks no one told you"
"How to ace your SAT or ACT by studying less"
"If you're too tired to study, watch this video..."
"How to become THAT STUDENT"
"How to study when you don't feel like it"
"How to Cram for Exams SO FAST it feels ILLEGAL"


Her entire M.O. is about getting the grade with as little work as possible, not about enjoying or even understanding the subject.

If there's anybody that somebody should be getting study skill advice from, it's her.

Yes, I agree she is very good at study skills. My point is that she basically majored in study skills, and it's no surprise that that's what she choose to do as a career afterwards. Everything about her college application, her college coursework, and her videos right now are directed at how to get your grades, not at how to do or learn science for its own sake.

"We're also just talking about one person, there are many insane minds that have got through that school majoring in a lot of different fields and I guarantee far more have contributed to science and engineering than not."

That's debatable. The primary beneficiary of a Caltech degree is the student who gets it. Most graduates end up choosing a job for the money and making a lot of it for their employer, not necessarily contributing to the greater good in any way.

I mean hell, when I graduated most of my classmates were taking jobs building war machines for defense contractors or doing cryptography for the NSA because that's who was hiring at the time. The next generation after me was all about going to Microsoft/Apple and FAANG so they could game people's psyches and get them addicted to tech for the benefit of advertizers. Now the next generation is probably all jumping to AI so they can help CEOs across the world realize their dream of finally not having to pay any workers other than themselves. A Caltech degree provides a GREAT opportunity for the recipient to use however they wish, but in most cases they're going to benefit themselves and perhaps the people directly around them with it.

 

[2 Up 2 Down]

Yup. Albeit, I grew up just before cellphones really took off by the time I was a teenager, watching my parents read and having them instil that activity in me was vital.

Schools can only do so much but parents have to do a lot more heavy lifting. Rather than treating teachers like glorified babysitters.

Exactly.
Numerous studies have shown the benefits for childhood development from reading. That alone should be enough for parents to get their kids reading

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Exactly.
Numerous studies have shown the benefits for childhood development from reading. That alone should be enough for parents to get their kids reading

What % of parents do you think have ever based their parenting decisions on studies?

There needs to be a means of publicly disseminating good parenting information in a manner that reaches the parent. And we have zero infrastructure for that in the USA.


In Finland, every single new parent when they leave the hospital gets a gift of a book bag filled with children's books and a family reading guide. The importance of reading is literally baked into the birthing process. They also gives both mothers and fathers 7 months of paid family leave to stagger however they want so there will be personal parental attention on the baby through its first year.

 

[IIVI]

But like she said, she did it by being good at gaming the system. She says herself that she's not the most brilliant student, nor does she work the hardest, and she talks about a lot of Caltech students being on a completely different tier than her intellectually. But what she was extremely good at was determining exactly what she had to do to complete the A and then doing that.

The best students I knew were taking those toughest upper-division courses AND taking the interesting upper-division courses in other subjects too, sometimes even to the point of double-majoring. I had good friends who double-majored in physics and engineering, double-majored in engineering and computer science, double-majored in physics and math with upper-division biology or computer science courses on the side. Friends who graduated with multiple units over what they needed to or who registered for EXTREMELY difficult courses in their major that weren't even required by their degree path, just to challenge themselves. My point is that students who seriously care about the shyt they're studying don't duck interesting courses just because they're afraid of getting a B. It's not like she was overworked, she straight up said that she got 8 hours of sleep a night and had a balanced life. She could have chosen to only get a B or C in some courses that she cared less about so that she had room to take those other tough courses she was really interested in. But she purposely chose to prioritize maintaining a 4.0 average over taking the courses she actually wanted to take.

I don't necessarily think this is right. Some of the most brilliant scientists, physicists and engineers have absolutely got burnt out, took the easy route to get school over with, etc. There are Fields Medal winners like Stephen Smale who had a horrible GPA in college and didn't start taking Math seriously until their Graduate Courses when they finally saw something that interested them. Terrence Tao even says there hasn't been an opportunity for a problem that he's found worth it to explore to the bones yet. There are a whole lot more examples, basically happens every year to people.

By her own account she said she got bored at Caltech towards the end and found her courses and especially lab work not only easy but really tedious/boring and hated repeating the same experiment 10 times straight with the same result. She said those lab sessions with her professors pretty much dissuaded her from going for a PhD because she was bored out of her mind and legit says she thought there'd be more to her major than that. She also mentions how much more challenging consulting was to her vs lab work/engineering and that motivated her more. I'm not saying she's Einstein, but a lot of the most famous scientists and engineers throughout history have gone through similar spans, it doesn't make them less brilliant/smart. Like most people who attend these schools, she's insanely gifted to be able to go to and ace those infamously difficult Caltech ChE courses, but fact of the matter is all these people are human and like many people who do go to these schools they get bored, even if they have multiple majors.

Some people even just want to get it over with so they can start working already. Again, doesn't make them any less smart because if they ever find the right thing that invigorates them they'll attack it. Some may feel the more interesting problems are being done by companies and not in school so they'll power through school in order to get into the workforce. Some people will go from college right into the military or move to another country for this reason. There are those that never find that thing they're interested in. Additionally some learn more about a topic and be like "Dang, I thought it'd be more interesting than that". That was me for awhile as an Electrical Engineering major in my Junior year and now I'm not so sure I want to do Digital Electronics anymore (although designing Analog Circuits has reinvigorated my interest).

I got an Astrophysicist cousin who has an MS Physics and he thought he'd be out in the field all day looking at the solar system. Turns out all they do is point an instrument at a planet/star and parse data from the computer all day using Python.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I don't necessarily think this is right. Some of the most brilliant scientists, physicists and engineers have absolutely got burnt out, took the easy route to get school over with, etc. There are Fields Medal winners like Stephen Smale who had a horrible GPA in college and didn't start taking Math seriously until their Graduate Courses when they finally saw something that interested them. Terrence Tao even says there hasn't been an opportunity for a problem that he's found worth it to explore to the bones yet. There are a whole lot more examples, basically happens every year to people.

Breh, you're confirming what I said not disputing it. You're saying that those "real mathematicians" put their full effort forward on the things that interested them and slacked off when it didn't. She was the opposite - she put forth her effort to get A's in classes she didn't even care about and avoided even taking the classes that interested her. THAT is what I am talking about, the desire to prioritize grades over the subject matter, not their GPA at the end.

By her own account she said she got bored at Caltech towards the end and found her courses and especially lab work not only easy but really tedious/boring and hated repeating the same experiment 10 times straight with the same result. She said those lab sessions with her professors pretty much dissuaded her from going for a PhD because she was bored out of her mind and legit says she thought there'd be more to her major than that. She also mentions how much more challenging consulting was to her vs lab work/engineering and that motivated her more.

She purposely avoided classes that were interesting in order to maintain her 4.0 GPA, and then got bored by the classes she did take. What a surprise lol.

And not only is management consulting a pathetic sellout job (especially for someone like her who seems sort of anti-capitalist), she didn't even like that management job, she quit during her 2nd year to focus on youtubing and tutoring.