Double Major in One Year

[RationalBiker]

Here's an article about a guy who graduated UVA in one year with a double major, Physics and Math. It helped that he went into his first year with 72 AP credits from high school, but it's still quite impressive.

Rock on David Bahn!

[JASKN]

That was sweet! Talk about having your priorities in check.

[LaszloWalrus]

How did he get 72 AP credits? That's amazing.

[hunterrose]

Man, that is impressive.

*hunterrose is inspired to get off his duff*

[diverbetty]

Wow - And I was excited that my 16-year old daughter in her Junior year is taking AP BC Calculus (continued from Sophomore year), AP Latin, and AP Physics. She's smart enough, but not a genius. Anymore than this, and she wouldn't have time for varsity sports, or friends.

But how did this guy get so many AP credits from highschool?! Even if a high school offered that many AP classes, wouldn't a lot of them overlap and conflict timewise? Sheesh!

-Impressed but flabbergasted mom.

[RationalBiker]

This article from the Washington Post has a little bit more detail.

[thejohngaltline]

From the Post article:

His college education, almost entirely covered by a patchwork of scholarships, cost him about $200. And he sold back textbooks for more than that.

...I'm impressed he was able to sell books back for that much! I usually get a whopping 40 bucks, after the 400 I spent initially. Although eight semesters' worth of books at once might do the trick.

That is amazing! Something tells me we'll hear this guy's name again in the future.

[Febod]

I think this guy needs a girlfriend.

[RationalBiker]

I think this guy needs a girlfriend.

A question of the intent of this remark has come up in private. Can you explain in further detail what you mean?

[davidmsc]

1. I think what the comment meant was that someone who spent so much time on studies probably has very little social life (although that's not necessarily true).

2. Regarding the original post: very impressive for such a young lad, although I completed 60 credits in 12 months for my graduate program. Granted, I was much older and more organized, etc -- I'm saying it only to demonstrate that it is not impossible (or even improbable). Bringing those 70+ credits to the table made all the difference, and likely motivated the kid to work that much harder to attain his goal in such a short time.

[softwareNerd]

1. I think what the comment meant was that someone who spent so much time on studies probably has very little social life

Actually, the comment meant more than that: not merely that he didn't have a social life, but that he was wrong not to have one. The implication was that he should spend less time on what he was doing and more on getting a girlfriend.

I didn't read the articles in their entirety, so I don't know if there was something in them that hinted that this young man's motivation was irrational in some way. I figure he now has more time an money to spend on girls!

[Febod]

A question of the intent of this remark has come up in private. Can you explain in further detail what you mean?

Software nerd expressed my thoughts well; This guy is wrong not to have a social live.

I knew many kids like this in college (mostly in the honors engineering program) and while they were really smart and did well in school, they seemed fixated at some preliminary social stage of development.

I agree that career is more important than girls, but not that much more important.

But maybe this kid is actually fine and i'm making a deal about nothing.

[DavidOdden]

Actually, the comment meant more than that: not merely that he didn't have a social life, but that he was wrong not to have one. The implication was that he should spend less time on what he was doing and more on getting a girlfriend.

This is a pretty standard response from academicians and advisors, and appalling so. An undergraduate education is now seen as an opportunity to explore, to find yourself, to "discover the world", to have fun, but not, definitely not, to master knowledge of a coherent aspect of the world. Note the 7th para. in the Post article: "Many professors would like students to explore and experiment in college rather than cram in as much as possible at top speed".

[DavidOdden]

Software nerd expressed my thoughts well; This guy is wrong not to have a social live.

Why? What is the purpose of going to a university? If the purpose of attending a university were expanding your social life, then I would agree that the guy was wrong. But that is not the purpose of a university (although that may be how universities are being packaged these days. Perhaps in the near future, the purpose of universities will change in the way you seem to imply that they should, at which time men of the mind will need to create a new kind of institution, dedicated to education rather than socialization. But until that day comes, the guy was entirely right to focus on his education while attending an educational institution.

To put it the other way, it is people who attend universities for the purpose of socializing who are wrong. Very wrong. They should instead attend bars, and not weigh down universities with their disregard for learning.

[Ifat Glassman]

I knew many kids like this in college (mostly in the honors engineering program) and while they were really smart and did well in school, they seemed fixated at some preliminary social stage of development.

What would be "fixation at some preliminary social stage of development"?

Would you describe your attitude for such excellent students as "get a life"?

The appropriate response to achievements is admiration.

I could understand if such a person was your close friend and you would give them an advice on their personal life because you want them to be happy. But to generalize all students who invest a lot in their education as being wrong ("like, get a life dude <smashing beer can on my head>)" - that cannot be motivated by concern for their happiness. It is contempt for a lifestyle. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

To put it the other way, it is people who attend universities for the purpose of socializing who are wrong. Very wrong. They should instead attend bars, and not weigh down universities with their disregard for learning.

[softwareNerd]

Software nerd expressed my thoughts well; This guy is wrong not to have a social live.

Just in case it wasn't clear, I was not expressing any agreement, but merely explaining what you had said.

Here's a question: would you give the same "get a life" advice to the Roark you see in the beginning chapters of Fountainhead?

[RationalBiker]

This guy is wrong not to have a social live.

I think it is incredibly presumptuous of you to make such a judgment against the guy.

I agree with Ifat on this one. Based on the available information, admiration of his achievement is what he deserves.

Additionally, David's comments are spot on as well.

[Febod]

Just in case it wasn't clear, I was not expressing any agreement, but merely explaining what you had said.

Here's a question: would you give the same "get a life" advice to the Roark you see in the beginning chapters of Fountainhead?

I understand we aren't in agreement.

Getting a college degree is far from a virtue, because all it boils down to is doing what other people tell you to do. Not that getting good grades is necessarily a bad thing, but if you put real stock into it, then i feel sorry for you. What counts is what you do with your education.

It's like listening to your mother when you were little. You probably should do what your mom says but if you keep attaching value to it like it was some great accomplishment, then yes, you need to get a life.

On the other hand, Roark embarked upon a journey in which he created his own existence on values that he created for himself... very different from studying for a midterm.

And as far as Roark's love life is concerned... It's a fantasy written by a woman. It reads like a romance novel. This is not how it happens in real life. Successful dating is more than just confidence derived from self-knowing. It's a skill set, it's a muscle built over time. Just like anything else in life, to get good with women you need to learn first. And the only way to learn is to date several.

moreover, women like dominique (exceptional women) are rare (as are exceptional men). Most women aren't good matches for me. So I date around and pick who i like and discard who i don't. All men and women should do the same.

[Febod]

I think it is incredibly presumptuous of you to make such a judgment against the guy.

Right, i don't know the guy so i don't make judgments about him personally. But i am generalizing his situation, and applying it to similar cases i know... i'm trying to derive a lesson based on a hypothetical i projected about his life.

[Olex]

Getting a college degree is far from a virtue, because all it boils down to is doing what other people tell you to do. Not that getting good grades is necessarily a bad thing, but if you put real stock into it, then i feel sorry for you. What counts is what you do with your education.

So, you are saying, degree is not really good, but doing something with your education is good. Something is not clear here. What do you mean by 'education' at the end there?

It's like listening to your mother when you were little. You probably should do what your mom says but if you keep attaching value to it like it was some great accomplishment, then yes, you need to get a life.

What does 'get a life' mean in this context?

On the other hand, Roark embarked upon a journey in which he created his own existence on values that he created for himself... very different from studying for a midterm.

How is it different? Because midterm was not created by him, and thus wasn't his creation/choice, and therefore not worth of pursueing?

... It's a skill set ...

What does this skill set contain? I presume this is something Roark could not have had, as he didn't date much if at all, am I correct?

[DavidOdden]

Getting a college degree is far from a virtue, because all it boils down to is doing what other people tell you to do. Not that getting good grades is necessarily a bad thing, but if you put real stock into it, then i feel sorry for you. What counts is what you do with your education.

Before you can do that thing with your education that counts, you need to get an education. I haven't seen you say anything that indicates that getting an education is a virtue, and you have almost declared that it is not. Now I understand perfectly the annoyance of having to actually follow the advice of people who know more about the topic than you do, for example when the physics faculty tells you that you need to take statistical physics in order to complete the Bachelor of Science major in physics and you complain that you don't want to because you just don't see why it's important in your life. Maybe it isn't important -- that means that you don't really want a BS in physics, maybe you want a BA in art history with a minor in physics that avoids the statistical physics class. The deal is, as an uneducated person, you are not in a position to say what the conditions are for your being awarded a BS in physics. You do get to say whether you are willing to do those things, and take the consequences of not doing those things. Since Banh is going for graduate school in physics, it's safe to say that he actually does like physics and doesn't consider it some form of helish torture to be gotten done with so that he can get on to the "real stuff". Possibly he even respects the judgement of those who actually know more than him. Hard to imagine, but it could be.

It's like listening to your mother when you were little. You probably should do what your mom says but if you keep attaching value to it like it was some great accomplishment, then yes, you need to get a life.

Well, we'll see what his accomplishments are in a couple of years, and perhaps we can compare his accomplishments to yours and see how the approaches differ. I seriously doubt that you have any evidence that he is just doing what his mom told him to do and thinks of obedience to his mom is a "great accomplishment". But if you do have some inside information, do tell. Otherwise...

[JASKN]

Febod, you're arguing two different things. First, you are saying that in addition to attending a university, students should also maintain a social life because it is better for them that way. Then you are saying that because attending a university is overrated, students should pursue other aspects of life as well, such as social interaction. I think you would agree with both of those positions, but they do not correlate.

I guess there must be a university out there with the legitimate intent to educate its students, which would be extremely refreshing, but I haven't seen it, and I've attended four separate schools. This "well-rounded" liberal arts approach is pathetic and embarrassing, and infuriating to me. (A short rant: Ohio State University's architecture program takes six years to complete if the student begins as a first year undergraduate. The first four years include an emphasis on architecture-related classes, with general education courses interspersed. Once a Bachelor in Architecture degree is obtained, the student then takes two more years of graduate classes in Architecture to earn his architecture degree. But get this: the architecture school will admit a student who already has an undergraduate degree in anything, then send him through an "accelerated program," which takes three years to complete; half the time!)

Also, the social aspect of life is something I personally have been trying to grasp an understanding of. I just can't decide if it is inherently important to a human life or not. For example, I held the belief that friendship/romantic interests were not necessary for me to live a happy life. The result seemed to be that I was almost always lonely, which was a double slam since with my premises I considered loneliness to be a fault. When I began forming my own social life, the feeling disappeared. Is the point being made here that while a student is at university, his social life is not important? I agree that the main focus should be on education, since that is the real purpose for attending school, but in my experience it would be disastrous to throw out social interaction in the meantime.

As I see the new post:

The deal is, as an uneducated person, you are not in a position to say what the conditions are for your being awarded a BS in physics. You do get to say whether you are willing to do those things, and take the consequences of not doing those things.

I am ignorant as to who is responsible, but I doubt you are: who is at fault for the year of time I waste on gen. ed. courses? Department heads? University bigwigs? Also, just because a course (non-gen. ed.) is part of the curriculum does not mean that it is essential or even important to a solid education in the subject. As far as I can tell, the explicit goal of most students at a university should really be: get that degree-proving piece of paper, not: get a solid education.

[DavidOdden]

I am ignorant as to who is responsible, but I doubt you are: who is at fault for the year of time I waste on gen. ed. courses? Department heads? University bigwigs? Also, just because a course (non-gen. ed.) is part of the curriculum does not mean that it is essential or even important to a solid education in the subject. As far as I can tell, the explicit goal of most students at a university should really be: get that degree-proving piece of paper, not: get a solid education.

Do you want the truth or a story? I feel the need to be somewhat cautious in how I phrase things so that I don't seem to be making slanderous accusations. The general education requirements are officially set by "the faculty" (via an internal legislative body), but that is done at the insistance of the higher authorities (the president or provost, for example) because of some vision or problem. I participated in the change that yielded the current OSU arts & sciences system, and I was impressed at how totally nonexistent the discussion was surrounding the why. The other important principle is that the requirements are only specified in very vague form, and the actual contents will be determined by numerous committees. At the level of the major, the requirements might be set by the undergraduate advisor or the faculty of the department. We've done it both ways; I decline to express a strong opinion as to which way is better.

I sort of sympathize with the "get the degree and go" approach, with the proviso that in order to get the degree (at least as long as there is any life left in my body and/or I have any say about the matter), you must prove that you have basic competence in some area, and if you cannot do that, you will have to be satisfied with some book-larnin' and no degree. I would not object if the system changed to something like the UK system with 3 years and you only take courses in the major. Most faculty don't like teaching to a captive and disinterested audience.

[Febod]

Well, we'll see what his accomplishments are in a couple of years, and perhaps we can compare his accomplishments to yours and see how the approaches differ. I seriously doubt that you have any evidence that he is just doing what his mom told him to do and thinks of obedience to his mom is a "great accomplishment". But if you do have some inside information, do tell. Otherwise...

Right, I have no idea who Bahn is as a person. I was simply responding to the laudations laid on him by the forum members. Getting a degree doesn't merit praise. I just graduated and so everybody says "congratulations" to me and i think, "thanks, but i really haven't done anything yet."

I didn't say Bahn went to college because his mom told him to. I was using the mom thing as an analogy to express the relative insignificance of a college education when compared to leading a productive, happy life.

Febod, you're arguing two different things. First, you are saying that in addition to attending a university, students should also maintain a social life because it is better for them that way. Then you are saying that because attending a university is overrated, students should pursue other aspects of life as well, such as social interaction. I think you would agree with both of those positions, but they do not correlate.

Yes, there are two points 1)attending university is overrated 2)seeking a happy social life is an imperative.

Students shouldn't seek social interaction because university is overrated, but because it's a piece in the puzzle that is happiness.

[DavidOdden]

I was simply responding to the laudations laid on him by the forum members. Getting a degree doesn't merit praise. I just graduated and so everybody says "congratulations" to me and i think, "thanks, but i really haven't done anything yet."

Okay, I understand. Actually, I think the reason why he is so praised here, and why I consider him to be praiseworthy, is because his actions are a clear example of significant accomplishment. It is important to understand that merely going through the motions and eventually getting the piece of paper is not really a laudable accomplishment, whereas getting a double major in hard science in one year and making a profit at it, to boot, is fan-fraggin-tastic. I would say that he has proven himself as a man of real ability, whereas many sheepskin-acquirers have yet to prove that then are men of simple competence.

Yes, there are two points 1)attending university is overrated 2)seeking a happy social life is an imperative.

Students shouldn't seek social interaction because university is overrated, but because it's a piece in the puzzle that is happiness.

What is the source of happiness? Does happiness inherently arise because you are in a group of people, doing something cooperative for the greatest common good; or simply, does happiness derive, automatically, from being with other people? You know, there are animals which are more or less like that, for example, sled dog breeds utterly hate being on their own and by nature they crave a pack. How is socialization related to happiness for people? My understanding of a happy social life is that it is only possible if you first have a happy life, which would mean among other things a happy career.