Why do students fail the Generals

[asianeconomist]

I observed something similar being discussed in another thread and thought that it would be interesting & useful for newbies to learn about the common instigators of failure. Verily, He who cannot draw on three thousand years is living from hand to mouth - Johann Wolfgang Goethe

 

I do realize that people might not be willing to discuss their inadequacies in such a public setting, but given the relative benefit to the recipients, I still believe that it is worth a shot.

 

My take on the matter is that, students who usually fail to pass the comps are often not motivated enough. Probably, they had entered the PhD without truly realizing the rigor and commitment required of them. Therefore, once they encounter the demands of the program, their relative lack of motivation does not enforce them to work hard enough.

 

I only hypothesize, hence don't criticize ;).

[Karina 07]

I have a friend in Stanford math who's failing out. I know it's not the same program but his reasons are probably comparable to some who fail out in econ. In his case it is that his undergrad wasn't very rigorous (wow, you can tell that I'm studying metrics -- I wanted to say "robust"), plus that he lacks a bit in ability compared to the other students. Plus that he says the other students are competitive to the point of being nasty.

 

Going by other people rather than just him, I would add to the list that you have to be able to deal with having something confuse you. A lot of people have never encountered anything they found hard before, and some people know how to deal with it and some don't. (Don't: avoid it, freak out over it, or think you're incompetent. Do: realize everyone has something they don't get, that the things people don't get will be different, and ask someone to explain it. It's *especially* important not to think you're incompetent, because I've observed one person acting that way and if you think you'll do worse you really will. (This is also independently confirmed in all sorts of experiments, that confidence has a role.) Plus people will start to actually think you're bad if you act like you're bad.)

[Old Liner]

If I am not mistaken, more than half of first-year graduate students last year failed their comps (on their first try) at my undergraduate school (top 20)! I think it has more to do with the fact that the comps are very, very difficult rather than any lack of preparation. There were a couple applied math. doctoral students in my graduate micro. course who were getting strictly average scores.

[Golden Rule]

My take on the matter is that, students who usually fail to pass the comps are often not motivated enough. Probably, they had entered the PhD without truly realizing the rigor and commitment required of them. Therefore, once they encounter the demands of the program, their relative lack of motivation does not enforce them to work hard enough.

So I'd qualify this by saying -- people I know who failed comps have generally been highly motivated. Some of them just didn't have a sufficiently rigorous math background coming into the program, and just never were able to overcome that despite all their efforts. In some cases, people have been away from school too long, in other cases, maybe people didn't have quite enough maturity coming out of undergrad, and probably another year or two off would have been good for them, and maybe this is closer to your hypothesis. Though when I say maturity, I more say managing time well, and balancing all the relevant commitments in life, though maybe some would describe that as "lacking motivation." I surely never doubted the good intentions of people who haven't passed, and I would definitely not describe any of them as lazy or lacking in motivation.

[buckykatt]

Going by other people rather than just him, I would add to the list that you have to be able to deal with having something confuse you. A lot of people have never encountered anything they found hard before, and some people know how to deal with it and some don't.

 

I think the above is probably true for many. Although I didn't fail my comps, it was certainly true that I cruised through my undergrad years without really having to learn how to study, and that learning good study habits was a challenge when I got to grad school. (Honestly, it's something I'm still working on. I mean, here I am taking a break from analysis to post to TM...)

[Connemara Pony]

Okay, coming from a system that doesn't do comps. What happens when you fail them? Do you get the option to resit them or what's the procedure?

[buckykatt]

Okay, coming from a system that doesn't do comps. What happens when you fail them? Do you get the option to resit them or what's the procedure?

 

Exact policies vary, but I think every program gives you at least one chance to retake them.

[YoungEconomist]

you have to be able to deal with having something confuse you. A lot of people have never encountered anything they found hard before, and some people know how to deal with it and some don't.

 

Lucky for me I find myself confused all the time. ;)

 

In many classes, I find that I am often very confused when we first start studying the material, but then after studying it for awhile things begin to make sense. Over the past year, I've often felt this way in Game Theory, Econometrics, Advanced Micro, Calc 1, and Calc 2.

[Olm]

(Don't: avoid it, freak out over it, or think you're incompetent. Do: realize everyone has something they don't get, that the things people don't get will be different, and ask someone to explain it. It's *especially* important not to think you're incompetent, because I've observed one person acting that way and if you think you'll do worse you really will. (This is also independently confirmed in all sorts of experiments, that confidence has a role.) Plus people will start to actually think you're bad if you act like you're bad.)

 

Aren't you glad Berkeley doesn't have comps? :grad:

 

In many classes, I find that I am often very confused when we first start studying the material

 

When you have a bad prof, this is inevitable; when you have a good one, he can present the most difficult and arcane subjects as manageable.

[Karina 07]

Aren't you glad Berkeley doesn't have comps? :grad:

 

This is totally unrelated, but you know how I'm taking a math course on the side? There's a person in that class who is so obnoxious. Every time we bump into each other it's always "Oh my gosh, don't you find that course soooooo hard?" Er, I don't, so what am I supposed to say, "No?" And then they go on about how they are always just trying to write down every word the prof says, to pore over it later. Or people who are like "you don't understand this either, right? When so-and-so asked a question, I was so scared, because clearly she knew the material well, but you're lost, too, right?" Personally, I find this really annoying, because it's asked in such a way you can't help but either be a jerk or lie. So uncomfortable. So, yea, don't put your classmates in a situation like that :P. But maybe it's just me who's bugged by that. Then again, it's different when most of the class is suffering, and then it's a communal joke.

 

Okay, I'll stop rambling and get back to studying....

 

P.S. On the other hand, people who are holier-than-thou are annoying, too....

[pevdoki1]

What math course are you taking, Karina? Graduate level?

 

I was thinking of perhaps taking graduate analysis during the second year, but also afraid of it taking up too much time..

[dyiwang]

At my school there are three comps, each 6 hours long and one for each of the three topics we have to take in our first year: micro, macro, metrics. Given that people who fail in the initial try can redeem themselves after the summer, some students focus on two and study less for the third so this way they can pass at least 2 and take care of the third one after the summer.

[Olm]

This is totally unrelated, but you know how I'm taking a math course on the side? There's a person in that class who is so obnoxious. Every time we bump into each other it's always "Oh my gosh, don't you find that course soooooo hard?" Er, I don't, so what am I supposed to say, "No?"

 

If that's the way you feel... I think you are doing them a disservice by telling them that you don't understand it either when you do. People have different backgrounds and levels of preparation, study skills, etc.; it's inevitable that some people are going to do better in certain classes than others. Some people are able to find out what's wrong, pick up the slack and slaughter everyone's *** on the final, while others don't do anything to change the situation and fail.

 

Then again, what I run into a lot are people who say "I never study!" but in reality study constantly. This is especially true of one ethnicity, who shall go unnamed so that I may avoid the ban hammer. :D

 

on the other hand, people who are holier-than-thou are annoying, too....

 

I've been lucky enough never to meet anyone this arrogant. Then again I don't go to a top 10 :whistle:

[08Applicant]

P.S. On the other hand, people who are holier-than-thou are annoying, too....

 

I'm sure if they have that attitude in a graduate course, they're doing alright for themselves. But in undergrad, my math professor always thought the least of these students. He said these kids never tried a day in their lives. They're assigned homework and each solution falls in their lap in a few minutes.

 

Some of these kids are usually a bit "off" anyways. So when they hit a course that they struggle with, 9/10 fall apart. They simply don't know how to learn. I've seen these kids break down. It's weird and sad. Many are very poorly socially adjusted. Handling stress, reaching out to faculty and peers for help, and just being part of the group is foreign.

 

I'm glad I'm dumber than they are. I learned that stuff early on.

[Karina 07]

To be tactful, I think I've come to adopt the response of "Actually, I'm finding [X other topic] more difficult." I'm not sure if that's the best response but it both lets me avoid lying and yet fulfills the social expectation, doesn't make the other person feel too bad. But as you say maybe on the rare occasion people should feel bad :P (I mean in the sense of then going to study more).

[Karina 07]

What math course are you taking, Karina? Graduate level?

 

Yea, it's on a hodge-podge of things. So far a bit of random walk, Brownian motion stuff... if it helps describe it at all, it seems a lot like a "math for physics grad students" course. Or at least the prof is oriented towards those interests. Next year I intend to keep up an extra math grad course a term. Some profs are for the idea of taking math on the side, one I've met is against (I'm not entirely sure why. I think he likes people to focus deeply in their areas first).

 

Handling stress, reaching out to faculty and peers for help, and just being part of the group is foreign.

 

Great point. I remember when I thought that nobody who was good at math would buy or open the math textbook that a course was taught from. :doh:

 

Also, I think that the thing that has served me best so far in the econ PhD has perhaps been my earlier jump into physics. See, in undergrad there was one point when all of a sudden I was gung-ho about physics, and jumped into the 2nd term of the freshmen's honour sequence (for, you know, people who had won physics contests in high school), without having ever taken any physics before (not even in high school) and without either of the two math prereqs. So that was an experience. :whistle: I was *crap* the first term. The second term and afterwards were alright, but it was really a lesson. Personally, I had the study habits before (my high school was amazing, so I actually developed them there; 1/3rd of us went to top U.S. schools for undergrad), so the big step for me rather than study habits was yea, learning to ask people for help while still having some confidence in myself, and realizing that even if material looks bad at first it's not so bad in the end and I shouldn't panic.

 

Not that the coursework (at least at Berkeley) is *that* bad. The step up is less, I think. But I guess it would depend on what you're stepping up from and etc. Anyway, it was a helpful experience to have had.

[Fulbrighterpak]

Related to this topic : Why people fails comps....sometimes the reasons could be beyond ones control for instance one of 2nd year student at Brown told me that although comps primary purpose is test your grasp and understanding of material....sometimes departments are forced to use it in bit more sinister sense...For example if the incoming class is too big than average class sizes in past years...than they may weed off more ppl.....if funding decreases or maybe the next year yield of incoming class higher....than also you are more likely to face the axe.....

 

This was based solely on the fact that they do not tell the cut off points on Core exams and historically when classes are bigger more ppl get the axe....atleast past 10 year data suggest that....

 

Ofcourse one can argue ( I am sure economist love to do that after sitting in those seminars...hehe ).....but point is LACK of MOTIVATION or ABILITY are not the only factors....behind failing comps

[Golden Rule]

Ofcourse one can argue ( I am sure economist love to do that after sitting in those seminars...hehe ).....but point is LACK of MOTIVATION or ABILITY are not the only factors....behind failing comps

agreed... I should have mentioned that possiblilty in my list. My class I had some people retake exams after failing the first round, and I seriously felt like they were going to fail some of those a second time no matter how hard they worked over the summer.

[asquare]

There are many reasons for failing prelims. Some have been mentioned: insufficient preparation, bad planning, or lack of motivation. But don't forget that these exams are noisy measures of what you know about economics! You can have a bad day or misunderstand a question, and wind up failing an exam even though you know the material well. Don't assume that people only fail because they are not prepared, for whatever reason, to perform up to the required level.

 

Other reasons for failing include not preparing well for the structure of the exam. If you go to a school that includes a lot of proofs on the prelims, but you study problem solving techniques, you will be in trouble. The reverse also holds. Students sometimes underestimate the scope of the exams -- they often cover ALL of micro/macro, not just what was emphasized in class or on class exams. Also, students fail if they get bogged down in details. Professors want to see that first and foremost, you understand the basic concepts and have decent intuition. If you skip immediately to the complicated math, you may make a mistake there and also fail to demonstrate that you get the big point even if you miss some of the details. (Related to this, don't assume that As in classes translate automatically into passing the prelims!)

 

There have been a lot of threads on this subject, and you can find old ones by using the search function at the top of each page. For information about what happens after failing, see this thread.