Jump to content
Urch Forums

Is W in Intermediate Macro that bad?? Even if I do well later?


db2018

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

 

I am currently a junior and taking intermediate macro theory this semester. I am a math and econ double major.

But the problem is that this professor who's teaching my intermediate macro is just giving everyone a very hard time and no one is doing too well (he's on his two-year term at my school and this is his last semester lol). I was wondering if dropping this class and getting a W in it would significantly hurt my chances of getting to top 20 phd programs? I will be re-taking the course with my advisor in the coming fall, and I expect to do well in that class maybe my advisor could even mention in the recommendation letter that I am doing it fine (assuming that I do) in that class.

Let me know what you guys think!

FYI: I have gotten good grades in other challenging courses including multivariable calculus, real analysis, comp sci courses, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess if you're taking grad micro I or some other very advanced econ course next fall as well, it wouldn't matter as much. But getting a W in intermediate macro in your junior spring semester is not ideal at all, especially because you'll have to waste more time on this course next semester. How difficult would it be to try to tough it out and aim for an A-/B+? Edited by chateauheart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is probably going to notice. What is concerning is that you can't handle intermediate macro because your professor is giving everyone a "hard time". In graduate school every professor gives everyone a "hard time". If you can't adversity in intermediate macro, what are you going to do when you start graduate school and every class is like this or worse?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is probably going to notice. What is concerning is that you can't handle intermediate macro because your professor is giving everyone a "hard time". In graduate school every professor gives everyone a "hard time". If you can't adversity in intermediate macro, what are you going to do when you start graduate school and every class is like this or worse?

 

Echo this comment as well. It's impossible to know from our perspective just how tough the instructor is being, but typically, someone who's good enough to get into an econ PhD should be pretty happy to get a tough instructor on an intermediate macro theory class. The jump from undergrad macro to grad macro is so huge that even an unusually tough undergrad macro class is unlikely to be half-way as difficult as grad macro, and there are plenty of UGs who try to take grad macro in their junior or senior year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said "hard time" because I didn't want to explicitly talk about every detail this professor is doing. Almost everyone in his class filed a complaint together to the department chair hoping that he changes a little bit. But I get what you mean. I am certainly ready for a challenging class but I just hate professors that are just so indifferent about teaching and blatantly doesn't give a crap in classes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd just take the W... but only because your advisor is teaching it next semester. That gives you a good reason for the W if anyone asks (or you want to mention it in your SOP).

 

I think some of the comments in this thread already are a little harsh. Sometimes a professors methods and approach are so jarring that even otherwise solid students cannot succeed in a class. This may or may not be the case here but I'd give the OP the benefit of the doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said "hard time" because I didn't want to explicitly talk about every detail this professor is doing. Almost everyone in his class filed a complaint together to the department chair hoping that he changes a little bit. But I get what you mean. I am certainly ready for a challenging class but I just hate professors that are just so indifferent about teaching and blatantly doesn't give a crap in classes.

 

Not to beat a dead horse, but again, that basically describes most graduate courses. No serious researcher wants to teach; they want to do research and will view anything other than research as a nuisance that they could give two craps about. Graduate courses are tough not only because the material is harder and there is more to cover in less time, but also because the professors tend to phone it in and are generally terrible teachers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to beat a dead horse, but again, that basically describes most graduate courses. No serious researcher wants to teach; they want to do research and will view anything other than research as a nuisance that they could give two craps about. Graduate courses are tough not only because the material is harder and there is more to cover in less time, but also because the professors tend to phone it in and are generally terrible teachers.

I know brilliant researchers--including Nobel prize winners--who are splendid teachers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know brilliant researchers--including Nobel prize winners--who are splendid teachers.

 

That is great startz, so do I. However, in my graduate program, my department, and the three other prominent departments that I visited, most were and still are mediocre (not counting the lecturers)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I said "hard time" because I didn't want to explicitly talk about every detail this professor is doing. Almost everyone in his class filed a complaint together to the department chair hoping that he changes a little bit.

 

Yes, but in a class of maybe a hundred students, and with only 1-2 of them ever going on to grad school, you're supposed to be the rare student that can take it on the chin. Unless his evaluation has a huge randomness factor, or unless his curve wildly deviates from the norm, I see no reason why you can't aim for at least a B+ or an A- in the course. This really shouldn't be an issue. A fair proportion of awful teachers exist in every U.S. university, and some U.S. applicants manage to get a very consistent 3.9+ GPA in their math/econ courses anyway, because inconsistent teaching doesn't really prevent you from consistently being in the top 20% of the class, and certainly not from the top 50%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but in a class of maybe a hundred students, and with only 1-2 of them ever going on to grad school, you're supposed to be the rare student that can take it on the chin. Unless his evaluation has a huge randomness factor, or unless his curve wildly deviates from the norm, I see no reason why you can't aim for at least a B+ or an A- in the course. This really shouldn't be an issue. A fair proportion of awful teachers exist in every U.S. university, and some U.S. applicants manage to get a very consistent 3.9+ GPA in their math/econ courses anyway, because inconsistent teaching doesn't really prevent you from consistently being in the top 20% of the class, and certainly not from the top 50%.

 

For some professors, you can easily be in the top 20% of a class and get a C+ or a B-. If the applicant's profile is otherwise solid, I'd simply take the W, try to learn from the experience, and move on.

 

For me, I got a D in Matrix Algebra II... I simply could not understand what the professor wanted me to know or the exam questions they asked. Other students seemed fine with the methods and questions. It was bizarre. I got A's in every other math class. I should have withdrawn from that class, the D cost me way more than the W would have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jumping in to say that I took a W in my first attempt at Real Analysis. The course was cross-listed between undergrad and grad students (many of whom had taken Real Analysis as undergrads and had thus seen the material before), and the professor was curving the two groups as one. As an undergrad who'd never seen the material, that made it extremely difficult for me to land in the top half of the distribution.

 

I re-took the course and did well. Given my admission results and the rest of my profile, it's hard for me to say how much the W cost me, but I did get top-15 offers when I applied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are still talking about advanced math courses. OP is taking intermediate macro in their 6th semester in college. Underpreparation shouldn't be an issue, and the demographic should be substantially weaker than an advanced pure math class.

 

Like I said, it's not possible for me to know exactly how ridiculous the course was, but I really want to emphasize that this doesn't typically happen to strong students. So yes, I do think it's going to look bad on a transcript. If the instructor was in fact uniquely awful and unreasonable, it's going to affect your chances nonetheless because the adcoms have no way of knowing those caveats (having your letter writer explain the situation may help, but he/she can't afford to devote an entire page to your situation). Adcoms will assume with some positive probability that you could have just lacked initiative/discipline while taking the course, as I do.

 

I'd still recommend carefully looking at whether you actually have a chance of getting a B+/A-, perhaps by asking the instructor directly, and to work very hard for that goal if you do have a chance.

Edited by chateauheart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are still talking about advanced math courses. OP is taking intermediate macro in their 6th semester in college. Underpreparation shouldn't be an issue, and the demographic should be substantially weaker than an advanced pure math class.

 

Like I said, it's not possible for me to know exactly how ridiculous the course was, but I really want to emphasize that this doesn't typically happen to strong students. So yes, I do think it's going to look bad on a transcript. If the instructor was in fact uniquely awful and unreasonable, it's going to affect your chances nonetheless because the adcoms have no way of knowing those caveats (having your letter writer explain the situation may help, but he/she can't afford to devote an entire page to your situation). Adcoms will assume with some positive probability that you could have just lacked initiative/discipline while taking the course, as I do.

 

I'd still recommend carefully looking at whether you actually have a chance of getting a B+/A-, perhaps by asking the instructor directly, and to work very hard for that goal if you do have a chance.

 

I don't think the course is as important as you suggest. If that professor had been teaching Lin Algebra, I'd probably have struggled just as much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are still talking about advanced math courses. OP is taking intermediate macro in their 6th semester in college. Underpreparation shouldn't be an issue, and the demographic should be substantially weaker than an advanced pure math class.

 

Like I said, it's not possible for me to know exactly how ridiculous the course was, but I really want to emphasize that this doesn't typically happen to strong students. So yes, I do think it's going to look bad on a transcript. If the instructor was in fact uniquely awful and unreasonable, it's going to affect your chances nonetheless because the adcoms have no way of knowing those caveats (having your letter writer explain the situation may help, but he/she can't afford to devote an entire page to your situation). Adcoms will assume with some positive probability that you could have just lacked initiative/discipline while taking the course, as I do.

 

I'd still recommend carefully looking at whether you actually have a chance of getting a B+/A-, perhaps by asking the instructor directly, and to work very hard for that goal if you do have a chance.

 

Okay it sounds like you want to argue that I am probably not a strong student and therefore having this problem. But I consider myself a strong student not based on my personal opinion but based on professors' take on. The reason why this whole situation is frustrating is because if I happen to get anything below A-, this would be my only course that I have not gotten an A or A- in. That is why I am considering dropping it and doing better it in later. My adviser was actually the one who brought up dropping it in the first place, not that I am trying to blame anything on my adviser at all. Just saying. And I just simply didn't know what the cost of having a W on my transcript. Like you said Adcoms have no way of knowing those caveat, so I was also wondering if mentioning it in the rec letter and doing better would even out the W.

FYI: I have gotten A's in all my math courses, which was one of the reasons my adviser considered just dropping it and explaining the situation in my application. But thanks for your input anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey minskymoment, thank you for your input. May I ask which classes those were? Like were they econ classes?

 

One was com sci and one was math. Both were around third week of the semester when I started to realized I'd stuffed my schedule too full on top of my college job. I remember being quite worried about how they would look at the time, but by the time I applied I started to realize they were barely noticeable with the other more important stuff on my application.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...