Update: Shanks not attending the U

Donate To GopherHole
G

GameDay

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
2,579
Reaction score
291
Points
83
Carson Shanks was going to initially be a walk-on at the U, and since he had to apply as a regular student, admissions denied him. (It makes me wonder how many of our student athletes would be able to get admitted to the U on their own merit if not for sports). Carson is now practicing with North Dakota and is starting classes this week per Darren Wolfson and Marcus Fuller. I think that could be a nice fit for him, and hopefully he is successful there!
 




SKOOKM said:
I wonder the same thing. The average class ranking and ACT/SAT scores of incoming freshman are higher than I remember them to have been in the past.

http://admissions.tc.umn.edu/academics/profile.html
Click to expand...

Ya If I remember right I thought that they bumped up there standards like 4 or 5 years ago. I know it was pretty much impossible for me to try to get into the Engineering program up there because I didn't have a 30 on my ACT.
 


Twinsfan007 said:
Ya If I remember right I thought that they bumped up there standards like 4 or 5 years ago. I know it was pretty much impossible for me to try to get into the Engineering program up there because I didn't have a 30 on my ACT.
Click to expand...

The standards went up in 2003. Before that, you could get into the U with a GPA under 3.0. I know because my cousin get in with a 2.75 and a low 20s ACT. The next year the standards went up dramatically, as another family member had trouble getting into the same program with a 3.3 GPA and a 25 ACT.
 

anyone know if they mean UND or NDSU? I work at UND and it would be fun to watch him.
 







Gopherguy0723 said:
The standards went up in 2003. Before that, you could get into the U with a GPA under 3.0. I know because my cousin get in with a 2.75 and a low 20s ACT. The next year the standards went up dramatically, as another family member had trouble getting into the same program with a 3.3 GPA and a 25 ACT.
Click to expand...

Yep, in order to give yourself a good chance of getting into the Carlson School of Management nowadays, a 29 ACT, 3.6 GPA (unweighted), and extracurriculars are needed. It's VERY competitive.
 

GameDay said:
Yep, in order to give yourself a good chance of getting into the Carlson School of Management nowadays, a 29 ACT, 3.6 GPA (unweighted), and extracurriculars are needed. It's VERY competitive.
Click to expand...

That really is tragic. It should not not be anywhere near that difficult.
 





Dr.Don said:
Says a guy who couldn't get in???
Click to expand...

No. I could've gotten in if I wanted to, but that's not what I wanted to do with my life. I could never work as some financial jerk or corporate peon. That's why I am a lawyer. :)
 

scher215 said:
Why? They should just let everyone in? There is only so much space. Why shouldn't it go to the best students?
Click to expand...

I am of the mind that the best students or smartest students are not always the people with the best grades or best ACT scores. I think every program should allow a good amount of people in with lesser scores. I am firmly against increasing selectivity in order to improve arbitrary US News rankings, which are a travesty and a shame that anyone actually abides by.

The U of M is a land grant university, and part of its mission of serving Minnesota should be serving those who aren't A- or better students.

I also have a problem with tests like the ACT, SAT, and LSAT, specifically their timing aspect. People have days or weeks to complete reading assignments and homework. Timing people on how fast they process information isn't a true indicator of their mental ability. For example, let's say A gets a 25 on the ACT and B gets 28. A left 20 questions blank or had to guess due to time constraints, while B finished the test with time to spare. Without the time constraint, A would score higher than B. A is smarter than B, but B scored higher because A reads or comprehends slower than B. In the real world, in the vast majority of businesses, you would want A as your employee, but for some reason B is regarded as a better student because B tests better when timed.

I also think the ACT and SAT are biased toward white males with money, as evidence has shown that these students score higher than every other race, gender, and demographic. I think that's a problem.
 

Gopherguy0723 said:
I am of the mind that the best students or smartest students are not always the people with the best grades or best ACT scores. I think every program should allow a good amount of people in with lesser scores. I am firmly against increasing selectivity in order to improve arbitrary US News rankings, which are a travesty and a shame that anyone actually abides by.

The U of M is a land grant university, and part of its mission of serving Minnesota should be serving those who aren't A- or better students.

I also have a problem with tests like the ACT, SAT, and LSAT, specifically their timing aspect. People have days or weeks to complete reading assignments and homework. Timing people on how fast they process information isn't a true indicator of their mental ability. For example, let's say A gets a 25 on the ACT and B gets 28. A left 20 questions blank or had to guess due to time constraints, while B finished the test with time to spare. Without the time constraint, A would score higher than B. A is smarter than B, but B scored higher because A reads or comprehends slower than B. In the real world, in the vast majority of businesses, you would want A as your employee, but for some reason B is regarded as a better student because B tests better when timed.

I also think the ACT and SAT are biased toward white males with money, as evidence has shown that these students score higher than every other race, gender, and demographic. I think that's a problem.
Click to expand...

In general though, everything in the Math section is similar, and that along with the English are basic knowledge. Those two shouldnt be hard to finish at all under time constraints with a little bit of practice. It's the Science and Reading, where students have to process a $hit load of information and answer 40 questions in 35 minutes that seems unreasonable, and not accurate of how good a scholar someone can be.
 

GameDay said:
In general though, everything in the Math section is similar, and that along with the English are basic knowledge. Those two shouldnt be hard to finish at all under time constraints with a little bit of practice. It's the Science and Reading, where students have to process a $hit load of information and answer 40 questions in 35 minutes that seems unreasonable, and not accurate of how good a scholar someone can be.
Click to expand...

You'd be surprised even by that. Number processing is also a factor for people, but number processing and word processing are different. Some people can do numbers at lightning speed, but not words and vice versa. Also, math has word problems. Some people have to read the problem multiple times in order to process the information. Having to read the question 3 or 4 times is a significant hindrance.

As for English, I don't understand the purpose of that section. Those are mostly rules of grammar and punctuation that anyone can learn. It measures more what you have been exposed to, than your mental capacity. A writing sample is a much better indicator of the student's ability to grasp the language than the ACT English section. Besides, these rules can be learned in mandatory writing classes.
 

Gopherguy0723 said:
In the real world, in the vast majority of businesses, you would want A as your employee, but for some reason B is regarded as a better student because B tests better when timed.
Click to expand...

In the real world, you need to think and act quickly. I can't tell you how many fire drills come up daily in my job and I'm sure lots of other folks can relate. Not completely dismissing what you are saying, but to say the real world values methodical thinking over quick thinking is false.
 

Rouser said:
In the real world, you need to think and act quickly. I can't tell you how many fire drills come up daily in my job and I'm sure lots of other folks can relate. Not completely dismissing what you are saying, but to say the real world values methodical thinking over quick thinking is false.
Click to expand...

It depends on what career you're talking about. In many instances, the quick decision isn't the best decision.
 

Rouser said:
In the real world, you need to think and act quickly. I can't tell you how many fire drills come up daily in my job and I'm sure lots of other folks can relate. Not completely dismissing what you are saying, but to say the real world values methodical thinking over quick thinking is false.
Click to expand...

That's really not true. The difference in processing speed between two people for a given problem is generally a couple seconds. That is, the difference from one standard deviation to the next standard deviation is a few seconds per question. In the real world, this distinction in speed is inconsequential, meaningless, or even useless. Most jobs don't require decisions to be made within seconds of learning information. Even if that was the case, it's even more rare for a job to require a series of decisions to be made in a row that requires very quick thinking. The only one that comes to mind that describes such a job would be an air-traffic controller. Again, this is based on reading processing. Verbal processing and thinking on your feet are not measured by these tests or any test that any employer I'm aware of ever administer. In sum, if you're at a job where you need to read anything and make a decision, then you want the smarter person not the faster person, as the speed distinction is so little that it won't ultimately matter in performance, but the ability to ultimately comprehend a problem and solve it is much more valuable.

You'll also notice that it's schools that require these speed tests. These tests are supposed to indicate who the best students will be, not who will make the best workers (I tied smartness to working, so that was partly my fault). But the need for speed that I'm referring to in order to succeed is demonstrably false both at school and at the office.
 

Can we please go back to gopher athletics, and the fact that we need a big man in this class still.

There is no perfect system for admissions, universities use metrics they feel give them the highest probability of selecting successful prospective students.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

gopherlaney said:
Can we please go back to gopher athletics, and the fact that we need a big man in this class still.

There is no perfect system for admissions, universities use metrics they feel give them the highest probability of selecting successful prospective students.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Well, they don't, that's the point.

Anyway, we do have a big man coming in, Josh Martin.
 

Gopherguy0723 said:
Well, they don't, that's the point.

Anyway, we do have a big man coming in, Josh Martin.
Click to expand...

First of all there are a lot more studies indicating standardized tests dictate future career success than the contrary.

Second of all, 6-7 is not a big man, it is a 3 or 4. I meant 5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

gopherlaney said:
First of all there are a lot more studies indicating standardized tests dictate future career success than the contrary.

Second of all, 6-7 is not a big man, it is a 3 or 4. I meant 5.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Well, that's actually not true. The evidence has been pouring in for a few decades now. Four-year schools are getting away from mandatory ACT/SAT testing because admissions people are finally opening their eyes to the truth and evidence. Many of these schools aren't no-name schools either. If you're interested, I'll find a list for you.
 

Gopherguy0723 said:
Well, that's actually not true. The evidence has been pouring in for a few decades now. Four-year schools are getting away from mandatory ACT/SAT testing because admissions people are finally opening their eyes to the truth and evidence. Many of these schools aren't no-name schools either. If you're interested, I'll find a list for you.
Click to expand...

Please find a list, I am interested.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

GameDay said:
Yep, in order to give yourself a good chance of getting into the Carlson School of Management nowadays, a 29 ACT, 3.6 GPA (unweighted), and extracurriculars are needed. It's VERY competitive.
Click to expand...

29 ACT? lol

I got rejected from Carlson with a 32 and 3.9 unweighted gpa coming out of high school.

Enrolled in CLA and managed to transfer into Carlson after getting a 4.0 freshmen year. It's brutally tough to get into.
 

Gopherguy0723 said:
I am of the mind that the best students or smartest students are not always the people with the best grades or best ACT scores. I think every program should allow a good amount of people in with lesser scores. I am firmly against increasing selectivity in order to improve arbitrary US News rankings, which are a travesty and a shame that anyone actually abides by.

The U of M is a land grant university, and part of its mission of serving Minnesota should be serving those who aren't A- or better students.
Click to expand...

The state has plenty of schools to serve students. The U is for the best.

Thankfully they've dropped the progressive "everyone gets a trophy" nonsense and have taken steps to compete with their peer schools academically: Madison, Michigan, UNC, Berkeley, and UCLA.
 

Gopherguy0723 said:
That's really not true. The difference in processing speed between two people for a given problem is generally a couple seconds. That is, the difference from one standard deviation to the next standard deviation is a few seconds per question. In the real world, this distinction in speed is inconsequential, meaningless, or even useless. Most jobs don't require decisions to be made within seconds of learning information. Even if that was the case, it's even more rare for a job to require a series of decisions to be made in a row that requires very quick thinking. The only one that comes to mind that describes such a job would be an air-traffic controller. Again, this is based on reading processing. Verbal processing and thinking on your feet are not measured by these tests or any test that any employer I'm aware of ever administer. In sum, if you're at a job where you need to read anything and make a decision, then you want the smarter person not the faster person, as the speed distinction is so little that it won't ultimately matter in performance, but the ability to ultimately comprehend a problem and solve it is much more valuable.

You'll also notice that it's schools that require these speed tests. These tests are supposed to indicate who the best students will be, not who will make the best workers (I tied smartness to working, so that was partly my fault). But the need for speed that I'm referring to in order to succeed is demonstrably false both at school and at the office.
Click to expand...


How about being a B10 BB ref?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom