How to raise money?
Pages
| Author | Topic: How to raise money? |
|---|---|
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, October 4 2004 06:10
Profile
Homepage
quote:This isn't really true. Most colleges have their own method for calculating high school GPA (which is usually weighted) so they ignore whatever your high school thinks your GPA is and calculate it themselves. My high school used the newer method for calculating GPA, but my college used the older method, so you'll get different answers if you ask my high school and my college what my high school GPA was. But most colleges calculate a weighted GPA. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4389
|
written Monday, October 4 2004 07:22
Profile
Homepage
TM- I'm technically in grade eight (the last year before high school), but I take about half high school courses. High marks in elementary are incredibly easy to score, yes. I'll probably graduate with mediocre marks, especially if I slack off as much as I do now. -------------------- fame fame fatal fame it can play hideous tricks on the brain Posts: 407 | Registered: Friday, May 14 2004 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Monday, October 4 2004 08:30
Profile
quote:Sorry - when I say "unweigh" I mean "use a four-point scale." In my experience as a study abroad coordinator/admissions person, I dealt quite a bit with other admissions-y folks. While there would be some discrepancy in the value of a plus or minus, almost all colleges would re-weigh or unweigh a five-point scale GPA to its four-point equivalent, or the "old system." From what I understand, the lion's share of high schools out there still use the four-point system exclusively, so in the interest of fairness to all of a college's applicants as well as efficiency, the re-weighing of the five-point GPAs makes sense. Personally, I think an across-the-board four-point system is best in high school anyway. AP kids already benefit from the curriculum and potential college credit, which transfers into dollars saved. Furthermore, is an AP "D" really worth a regular or "advanced" regular curriculum "C"? It's officially sanctioned grade inflation. [ Monday, October 04, 2004 11:11: Message edited by: Andrew Miller ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Bob's Big Date
Member # 3151
|
written Monday, October 4 2004 15:56
Profile
Homepage
It's called strength of schedule, you invincible dunderhead. No one wants to put an overmotivated underachiever into college, and a straight-A diploma loses some meaning if there's not an honors class in the lot. -------------------- The biggest, the baddest, and the fattest. Posts: 2367 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
Babelicious
Member # 3149
|
written Monday, October 4 2004 16:07
Profile
Homepage
My experience with AP classes is that they are sometimes inferior to similar honors classes. This is true especially with economics, where the tested curriculum is so broad there's no time for teaching anything else. It's actually an excellent method of indoctrinating high achieving kids with capitalist dogma. -------------------- I've got a pyg in a poke. Posts: 999 | Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, October 5 2004 04:38
Profile
Hey man, just expressing my opinion on the matter. I'm fine with being a dunderhead, as long as I'm invincible. :) Though the system is far from perfect, colleges do look at what's on a transcript, and to a degree, what high school an applicant is coming from when making their determinations. Colleges also have another tool to help them separate the wheat from the chafe - standardized tests! Although not perfect indicators by themselves either, test scores can shore up the story told by a transcript. High scores and high grades equal little cause for concern. Low scores might call for some scrutiny of a high-GPA transcript. High scores and okay grades pretty ably reveal the brilliant slackers, the category into which I reckon the lion's share of folks here probably fall, including me. :) [ Tuesday, October 05, 2004 04:48: Message edited by: Andrew Miller ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Tuesday, October 5 2004 05:02
Profile
Homepage
The system for university admissions in Australia is the work of some insane genius. Each student gets a study score for each subject taken in the last year of high school. Study scores range from 10 to 50; they're normally distributed, with a mean of 30 and a standard deviation of 7. The study score for each subject is scaled up or down by arcane and secretive mechanisms based on the subject's difficulty (essentially, based on how well students who did that subject did in other subjects). Scores closer to the mean are scaled more than those further away, so a 30 in a given subject might become a 35 but a 40 would only become a 42. The scaled scores are then added together and compared to the rest of the age group throughout the state to give a percentile score. The subtly different scoring systems for different states are then normalised to give each student who successfully completed high school a percentile score, the ENTER (Equivalent National Tertiary Entrance Rank). The ENTER score ranges from 0.05 (although scores less than 30 are reported only as "less than 30") to 99.95, and it's far and away the most important criterion for entrance into university. You can get into most courses on the basis of ENTER score alone, although some (like medicine and creative arts) have other requirements, such as a folio, interview or test. The whole process, from study score generation and scaling to ENTER score calculation to the submission of applications for university entrance, is overseen by a central authority, which changes its name every few years (it was the BOS 5 years ago, then it became the VBOS, and now I think it's the VCAA). Any American exposed to our system would likely choke on their tongues and scream "socialism" forthwith, but it's a lot more convenient than submitting a separate application to every university for every course you want to get into. -------------------- My BoE Page Bandwagons are fun! Roots Hunted! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, October 5 2004 05:09
Profile
Hey, I like the Australian uni system, especially the repayment plan, though I understand they may jack up the prices quite a bit for students, owing to budgetary problems. Still, having your repayment rate based on your income is pretty cool. EDIT: Isn't it the case though that most Australians will stick to the unis in their state? I had heard that most folks in WA stick to Murdoch and UWA, for example, while around Adelaide it's Uni Adelaide, Flinders and USA. [ Tuesday, October 05, 2004 05:13: Message edited by: Andrew Miller ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
This Side Towards Enemy
Member # 3098
|
written Tuesday, October 5 2004 11:19
Profile
The British one is rather different, in no small part because your last two years at a school or sixth form college are much more specialised than previous years, most students only studying 3 or 4 subjects (I'm doing 5 and know people doing 6, but one of those is general studies, which is in the main a pretty worthless subject.) You apply at the beginning of your last year and give your GCSE (the exams you did at 16 at the end of compulsory schooling) and AS (the exams you did at the end of your lower sixth year) results. You also put in the A levels you are now studying for (and any AS levels you'll be retaking or taking up - an AS equates to half an A level.) You also attach a personal statement which has to fit in a space on the form. If you type it, you can get about 600 words. It's to give you a chance to show why you're suited for the course you wish to take, what your interests are and generally why you should be picked. The form also has references from teachers and the like on it. This form is sent off to UCAS, who deal with university applications. They will pass on the details to the university, only hiding what other universities you are applying to. Through them you will then receive offers from universities conditional on achieving good enough A levels in the next summer examinations. Most students have to have the form sent in for December (I think.) Applicants for medicine, veterinary medicine, dentistry or courses at Oxford or Cambridge have to apply be 15th October. In addition, applicants to Oxford and Cambridge have to fill in separate applications for those universities. You have to apply earlier because these courses and universities interview in or around November time. The school is currently adding references to my UCAS form. It's a horrible thing to fill in, but at least my part in the process is over, for now. Oh, and you should also note that rather than having a major, in Britain you apply beforehand to study a specific course. -------------------- Voice of Reasonable Morality Posts: 961 | Registered: Thursday, June 12 2003 07:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, October 5 2004 11:26
Profile
Out of curiosity, in the British eye are colleges at Cambridge and Oxford not quite what they used to be? I know that England many other universities (Bristol, Kent, East Anglia, UCL, etc.) and was wondering how these stack up. If you don't make it into a college at Oxford or Cambridge, or a reputable program like LSE, are you pretty much a second class citizen in the academic world there? Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
...b10010b...
Member # 869
|
written Tuesday, October 5 2004 12:40
Profile
Homepage
Oh, I didn't say I didn't like the Australian uni system. It's just completely insane. HECS (the repayment plan you mention) has its advantages and disadvantages. A lot of students don't like the idea of being saddled with a long-term debt for getting into uni. There's also controversy over full-fee places, where wealthy students can have university entrance requirements reduced in exchange for paying the entire cost of their education (~$20000 a year compared to ~$6000 a year with HECS). The reality is that these are places that wouldn't exist were it not for the students paying for them, and students still have to do well once they're at uni to get a degree, so it doesn't bother me overly much, although of course I'd prefer if government funding to education were adequate to give a place to every capable student. quote:Well, I can only speak for Victoria, but yes, over here the better students tend to try to get into Melbourne or Monash, while the second tier go for local universities. -------------------- My BoE Page Bandwagons are fun! Roots Hunted! Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 618
|
written Tuesday, October 5 2004 14:16
Profile
Homepage
Well, Oxbridge has a large quantity of prestige attached. They have the largest budgets and the most resources, generally speaking. Then there are three other types. There's the "second rate" colleges. They aren't really second rate. Some rival Oxbridge for quality. If I remember correctly, Southampton and Loughborough are good examples of this type. Then there are the Polytechnics. They tend towards more practical courses and will generally specialise in a particular field. Anglia Polytechnic is a good example. These, in their fields, can give a better standard of education than Oxbridge, but there is a stigma occasionally attached to them. Then there are rest. They have a special name, but to be honest I can't remember it. They're generally the local unis. The quite small ones. The ones that unless you live in the local area, you are unlikely to ever hear of them. North Herts College is the only one I know of. Generally, no-one intends to go to one of these. Unless it's a really specialist course, like car part manufacture or something equally esoteric. [ Tuesday, October 05, 2004 14:18: Message edited by: FatBatMonkey ] -------------------- Aut Tace Aut Loquere Meliora Silencio Posts: 1487 | Registered: Sunday, February 10 2002 08:00 |
|
This Side Towards Enemy
Member # 3098
|
written Saturday, October 9 2004 14:00
Profile
FBM is functionally right in most areas, whilst giving out a generally misleading impression. There are about 100 universities in the UK now. Oxford and Cambridge still have the best reputations and are certainly very near the top in every subject they do. However, the Russell group of wealthier universities pushes them close and occasionally tops them (particularly Oxford.) Generally speaking, when they compile tables Cambridge comes top and Oxford is about fifth, but the tables are useless for all practical purposes. Going to Oxbridge brings a lot of prestige, but your workload is heavier. Getting into Durham, or York, or Bristol or one of the many other universities with good reputations and places that are easier to get than at Oxbridge is not looked down upon. The term polytechnic is no longer used and many former polytechnics are now very highly thought of. Others, such as APU (Anglia Polytechnic University) aren't. I don't know why FBM gave it as an example, because it's mostly known for semi-vocational courses and with entry requirements on the level of two Es, it's no surprise that neither its results nor reputation are particularly good. Essex is a better example of a former polytechnic which is now a perfectly respectable university. I'd say APU is more like North Herts (which I haven't heard of, and I'm 50 miles away from that area. Is it even entitled to give out degrees?) -------------------- Voice of Reasonable Morality Posts: 961 | Registered: Thursday, June 12 2003 07:00 |