Improvement Program Open House: Fill & Download for Free

I am sort of wondering why these questions on quora. Why can't we have some open house discussion in campus where you can shoot any question. That way we can have a better student-faculty relationship also.Anyway, this is allowed for PG students explicitly.The UG manual is silent on this, which means that it can be interpreted either way - that this is allowed, and that this is not allowed. When I was SUGC Chairman a few years ago, a student on the termination list (re-instated) came to me and requested that a lab course in which he had a "D" grade, he wanted to repeat. No one usually got any grade leas than "B" in that course. So he was hopeful that he will improve his CPI and get out of this termination cycle. I allowed it. And he received an "F" grade in the course. Now, the rule in IITK is that if you repeat a course, the latest grade stands. So his "D" was removed and his CPI reduced further, and his program was again terminated. (He would have been terminated even if the grade was a "D". So this really had no impact on him, but he was furious.) He filed a case against IITK, including naming me as an individual defendant, arguing that he was forced to repeat this course by me, when this is not in the rule book, and as a proof that he had indeed been forced to repeat that course, challenged me to give examples of other UG students who had similarly been allowed to repeat a course. To cut the story short, IITK won the case, but future SUGC Chairpersons never tried to interpret UG manual. In case of any confusion, go to Senate.

I wouldn't write an essay on why you didn't choose a specific school. But, programs do care about where you chose to go instead of them. They want to know if they're competing well against their peer institutions. Most places will ask for this information if you don't provide it.Also, many programs care about improving their recruitment process, so if there was something that was particularly ineffective, you might write a polite and short statement (no long missives are necessary). Things you might mention areI didn't get to meet/interact with enough relevant faculty membersI didn't get to meet/interact with enough graduate studentsother institutions offered me fellowshipsthe course requirements are much stricter than elsewherethe course offerings are less extensive then elsewhereI felt the open house was disorganizedThese are things that are readily changeable and the admissions committee appreciates these specific statements. Your statement alone won't change anything, but with enough statements big changes can happen. For instance, the administrative staff can do a better job of corralling faculty/graduate students, they can put more effort into making a coherent open house, the department can request more fellowships for graduate students from the dean, courses can be evaluated. Keep it short and directed and cordial. If you can't do that, don't write anything else.

I have served on an old FRAM destroyer, DDG 19, DD 971 and CG 26. I also worked for 13 years at Bath Iron Works. I believe all of our ships are well designed and built by craftsmen/women. Perhaps my most satisfying experience was as the program manager of the damage repair of the BIW built Samuel B. Roberts after she triggered a mine in the Persian Gulf 30 years ago. She arrived in Portland, Maine on a heavy lift ship from the Gulf. Before we started the repairs in earnest we (BIW and the navy crew) sponsored an open house for the craftsmen and their families.The welders took their families around the frigate to find their welds to see how they held up. Their pride of work was merited in that not a single weld had given way. Many plates had cracked but not a single weld. Later the shipyard threw a lobster bake to thank the crew for bringing her home. When we re-delivered her back to the navy, the program was under budget by $4.5 million, repairs completed two weeks early, and faster than during her new construction trials. She had been well built, well tested by BIW and the government's Supervisor of Shipbuilding, well maintained by her crew, and well repaired by the same team.Ingalls Shipbuilding experienced a similar success during their repair of the U.S.S. Stark. Both shipyards do excellent work. The competition between the two yards during the two Aegis programs has improved both companies and their workforces over the past 40 years. Both Roberts and Stark went on to serve for many years. American sailors are in good "hands."