Welcome Letter Prior To Attending Registration: Fill & Download for Free

Find the below details listed..!!Fee Structure 20171. Admission Registration fee of INR 5000/ (Non Refundable)2. Programme fee as per the below tableOn or before March 15, 2018It is to be noted that though the fee is fixed for both years, there may be a periodic nominal increase to meet the rise in costs.1. NRI fee is applicable for first year for candidates who have studied foreign syllabus (has to be approved by UGC / AIU) in the qualifying examination of study in India. (The above condition is not applicable to NRI and candidates applied under NRI Category).(The above condition is not applicable to NRI and candidates applied under NRI Category).2. NRI fee is applicable for the full duration of the programme for candidates who;2.1. Have pursued and completed their last qualifying exam from outside India.2.2. Are NRI and candidates who have applied under NRI category.3. To claim Indian / Karnataka category fee, the candidates should have studied last 7 years in India / Karnataka. (Not applicable for OCI, PIO and Foreign Nationals).4. Admission registration fee of INR 5000/- is non-refundable in the event of cancellation of admission. This fee will be apart from cancellation charges if any applicable.3. All Candidates If “Selected” after appearing for the final selection process, The fee may be paid through the following options:a) DD drawn in favor of Christ University payable at Bangaloreb) Cash at the South Indian Bank, Christ University Branch, Bangalorec) Pay via bank transfer to South Indian Bank, Christ University BranchTo pay via bank transfer, Candidates must contact [email protected] for details.Payment/Transfer of fees does not guarantee the admission.Refer this for more : https://christuniversity.in/institute-of-management/institute-of-management-mba/master-of-business-administration-(mba)RULES1. The working day is divided into two sessions, the forenoon session of 4 periods and afternoon session of 2 periods. Attendance is marked at the commencement of the class. Latecomers, therefore, though permitted to attend class by the teacher concerned, will not be given attendance.2. Every student must have the prescribed textbooks, laboratory records, dissecting instruments etc.3. No student shall absent himself/herself from classes without the prior permission of the Vice Chancellor.4. Students must have a minimum of 85% attendance to be permitted to write the examinations. Leave application will be accepted only if the actual attendance is above 75%.5. Students who are absent from classes for 2 weeks or more at a stretch without the permission of the Vice Chancellor obtained in writing, will be considered to have left the university.6. Students remaining absent for more than 2 days for any reasons (personal, co/extracurricular activities) have to submit the leave form duly signed within ten days of the leave period.7. When absence is caused by unforeseen events, application for leave must be submitted to the Vice Chancellor as early as possible and certainly not later than 3 days after return to the university.8. Application for leave of absence may be rejected by the Vice Chancellor if he is not satisfied with the genuineness.9. If the application for leave of absence is accepted, the student will be issued a form, which she/he has to fill in and get the number of periods engaged during a leave of absence along with the signature of the teacher concerned. The duly filled in form along with the original leave letter is to be submitted back to the Vice Chancellor within 3 days after the leave letter has been accepted.10. Tests are held periodically in every subject. Attendance cum progress report of the examination will be given to the student. Students are responsible to show their report to their parents.11. The attendance and progress report of each student is available at Christ University, Bengaluru - 560029 (parents can access it and monitor their children using the password given to each student), parents can get the user name and password, in case of any difficulty, from [email protected]. Students must not join any club or society or involve in any engagements that would interfere with the studies without the prior permission of the Vice Chancellor. They will not be permitted to play in any team against the university.13. Students are forbidden to organize and attend any meeting within the university, or collect money for any purpose or to circulate among the students any notice or petition of any kind or paste it on the university notice board without the written permission of the Vice Chancellor.14. Active participation in politics not compatible with the academic life of students and as such students are not expected to indulge in public activities, which are of a political nature.15. Students will not be permitted to make complaints in a body or present any collective petition but are welcome to present their case, if any, either individually or through their proper representatives.16. Students can park their four-wheelers inside the university campus only on payment of the prescribed fees.Some More…!!!1. Students say the dress code is discriminatory – the rules are heavily biased against girls. In the main campus, it’s shirts and trousers with belt for men and cotton churidhar or salwar and knee-length kurtas for women. Wearing a dupatta is compulsory.After leggings and lycra were banned some years ago, security guards were asked to check for the material used by students.They would stare at us, touch the fabric. You can’t touch girls’ legs.A former student2. No clapping, hooting and cheering in auditoriums. If caught, identity cards are taken away and the student is asked to meet the Dean.3. There can be a bandh in the whole state, but Christ University will conduct classes. Thankfully, attendance is not compulsory for all, only students living within a 3km radius have to attend.4. Christ University has its own penal code. Students who are late for sports practice – which starts at 6:30 am – are fined Rs 20. If students, including girls, don’t attend a session, they are fined between Rs 30-40.Fine for attendance shortage (per subject) is imposed. Students and lecturers allege that the university collects lakhs of rupees in fines.5. Security guards decide whether a late comer can enter the campus, while rules suggest that students will be allowed to attend class without attendance.6. Earlier, students were not allowed to remain in the hostel if they were sick. Now the rule has been removed, but if students are to stay out, their parents have to fax a permission letter a week in advance to the hostel in-charge.7. For some years, the college management called students’ parents for “ridiculous” reasons. So, even parents from the north-east who sent their kids to Bengaluru had to travel for several days to get to the college.8. Students who live in the college hostel are told to leave the hostel if their attendance in a semester is less than 85%.9. Hostelers are allowed one hour for dinner as food is not served in the hostel. They are asked to report to hostel between 8:15 pm to 9:15 pm. If you’re late by even a minute, you’re slapped with a fine of Rs 200. Students sometimes end up paying thousands of rupees in fines every semester.10. You can stay out only one night in a single semester, with parents’ permission. It doesn’t matter how many more permission letters you produce.(With inputs from TNM, The Financial Express)

Thanks for the A2A.I have been monitoring the reaction to the Reuters story over the last two weeks since it was published (March 28, 2016). I think it is too early to say what the ramifications of this story will be, but I will try to give some reactions by educators and then some predictions of how things may or may not change on the test and on the part of colleges and universities.Before doing so, however, in the interest of full disclosure, I need to mention I talked several times over the past year with two of the authors of the Reuters articles about topics related to students and education in China. In addition, I raised the issue of testing in China in an article I wrote last summer for NACAC’s Journal of Admission.The Reaction From EducatorsWhile there has not been universal consensus among the educators who have posted remarks about these stories on closed groups across the web, many have placed blame for the problems with the SAT on squarely on the College Board and its policy of recycling old questions on subsequent exams. They argue that in an electronic age all old questions will be recorded and given as study aids by those companies that gather all such information within minutes after each administration of the test. The College Board has been aware for years that old questions were being gathered by these companies in China (and other places too). Given that test security has been compromised over many years, The College Board respondedThe Reaction From The College BoardShortly after the Reuters’ stories were posted, The College Board responded with a “Note”:The College Board is not perfect; we did our best with the information we had at the time. We can and should do more. In fact, we have recently taken more aggressive actions to secure the exam internationally, including canceling an administration in China. We continue to balance widening access with protecting the exam. We recently refused entry to the first administration of the redesigned SAT to a number of high-risk registrants — many of whom make a living violating security protocols. In the future, we will need to do even more.We have been working with Reuters on these stories since summer 2015. During that period, we’ve made College Board leadership available for multiple interviews and shared more details about test security than we’ve provided any other news organization. We’ve been transparent with Reuters in an effort to make sure its readers better understand all that we do to protect the integrity of the SAT internationally and ensure the validity of the test scores we report. In the spirit of full transparency, we are sharing here the detailed letter we sent to Reuters with the facts of our decision-making.Even as we recognize where we need to do more, we are so proud of the new SAT and its impact on students. This is a time of remarkable, positive change for our century-old organization. In early March, more than 460,000 students took the redesigned SAT, which better reflects what students are learning in the classroom and connects them with distinct opportunities such as free practice tools and college application fee waivers.A note to our members regarding today’s Reuters articlesThe “Note” admits that there have been problems and that their are efforts to address some of the security issues related to test administration. What the Note does not address, and what has many educators worried, is that the College Board does not directly address the use of old questions on new versions of the test.What This Means For Future Test Takers And For Colleges And UniversitiesOne reason the College Board did not address this question may have to do with the fact that the most recent testing, in March, was the roll out of the new and updated SAT. The first test administration did have higher security and anyone not of college age was prevented from taking it (whether than can continue to do this may be something courts will decide). The effort to keep out professionals who are part of test preparation companies will not, however, keep these companies from gathering all the questions on the test. Some test prep companies get students to memorize questions and once the test is over all the questions are gathered and are then used to prepare the next set of test takers.What is important about the Note is not something that is included; rather, it is what is not addressed that is most telling. There is nothing in the Note that would lead me to believe that old questions will no longer get recycled on subsequent tests. As long as old questions are recycled there will be an unfair advantage to those who have had prior access to these questions.To come up with questions that allow The College Board to distribute scores across a wide range of student ability keeps many psychometricians employed by the Educational Testing Service (ETS). For those not familiar with the test design, the SAT yields responses such that average scores for students are approximately 500 out of 800 on each section of the test. For the test to produce these results each year questions have to be designed so that there is a reliable bell curve on responses by students. There have to be, to put it simply, some questions that are easy and others that are hard. For example, there are some questions that the vast majority of test takers will get right and there are some questions that are designed for almost all students to get wrong. Test designers create a test in which the range of responses always leads to a mean of close to 500. This requires test questions to be vetted before they are used as a part of the official test. The students taking the official SAT are not told which of the sections of the test is experimental and therefore are not scored for the students taking that particular SAT on that particular date. The experimental sections provide the data needed on the test questions. Once the psychometricians have measured the experimental questions in terms of how many will answer the question correctly, these questions can then be used as part of a “real” test given at some future date. Those companies and individuals who have gathered all the questions from the SAT on a particular date including the experimental section will then give students who have signed up for test prep access to these questions when they sign up for their test prep services. The Reuters stories supports what I have just written. It also raises the question of whether students’ SAT scores should be used for admission purposes.Colleges and Universities need to trust the SAT. If there is strong evidence that the test security has been so compromised that scores may not be accurate for many individual students, then the whole reason for requiring standardized tests comes into question. It is almost impossible, however, to determine which student has gained an unfair advantage by having access to old questions prior to the test date the student choose to sit.If getting access to questions that have appeared on previous tests this is “cheating”, then it is a far different kind than bringing in answers hidden in a calculator or some other device. The “cheating” that occurs when old questions are recycled occurs before the actual test is administered and therefore cannot be observed or determined by proctors or anyone else. It is, to sum up, almost impossible to prove if a student has benefitted from having had prior access. And this is when things get ethically murky. Some admission readers assume, at the outset, that certain students’ scores (those from China mostly) are not accurate because they have had access to questions. To assume this, however, is not the way we in the US say things should be done to individuals. Students should be innocent until proven guilty. In addition, a reader who assumes a student had an unfair advantage should permit the student to mount a defense. Students do not even know that their scores are being, if not dismissed, then at least looked upon with suspicion by admission officers. I have had a student write about his getting discriminated against for just these reasons Parke Muth, consultant: Case Study & Modest Proposal: Get to Know the Person or Country You JudgeThe SAT test does not simply give a score of an individual student; in addition, it demonstrates where the student stands in percentiles compared to all other test takers. Without a reliable score distribution the test would not work well for comparing students, not only on an individual test but over multiple tests a student might take. The SAT is also used by ranking businesses such as the US News to measure the selectivity and reputation of individual universities. The test scores must bear comparison to the test scores over previous and subsequent years for them to be useful. For example, if the average score of students who enroll at a particular college increases by 20 points over 5 years the school’s reputation wiill go up. This is only true, however, it the test scores can be usefully compared. In addition secondary schools as well as colleges are often measured by the average SAT scores of their students. The use of SAT scores to measure the educational quality of secondary school student will increase in the near future because the new version of the SAT is tied to the Common Core. As a result, SAT scores are now mandatory for all students in some States that use the Common Core. If, however, the scores are be unreliable then parents and educators who are anti-testing may mount lawsuits to halt the use of these tests.I have been outlining why it should be in the best interest of the College Board to discontinue the use of old questions on the SAT because I wanted to build a case that would prove, if not beyond a reasonable doubt, then at least one worthy of vigorous discussion. Now however, I need to suggest why the use of old questions will not change unless the leadership of the College Board feels they must build all new tests for each future date due to pressure from colleges and the public at large, (and, in a less likely scenario by the courts.)The College Board is well aware of the security issues and acknowledges them in their Note, but they are not in a position to create new tests for each subsequent administration. The reason that old questions may (and, in my opinion, almost certainly will) continue to appear is a matter of time and cost. The process of creating new questions that fit with the need to create score outcomes that match closely with previous tests, the need to use experimental questions to assure the questions perform in the way they need to in the aggregate, and the need to do this over multiple test dates each year is, as it stands now, an overwhelming task. While the College Board can tighten security in ways that will prevent conventional cheating the issue of using prior questions still remains unanswered.The SAT was designed long before the Internet. Test questions could be given across time zones and countries with little fear of questions being forwarded or posted. Now, however, the questions are sent around the globe in minutes. What should the College Board do? They have already created a new test in which some of the things students are asked to do are not easily subject to memorized answers. This is particularly true of the new writing section. From what I can tell the new section is a huge improvement over its predecessor. It ask student to write based on marshaling evidence--Critical thinking rather than memorization. It seems paradoxical then that most colleges and universities have made the writing section optional for students. The collages and universities do not want to discourage students who do not want to write an essay from applying to their schools. The section that is least susceptible to information sharing is the one that will be used least. I would hope that colleges and universities would strongly encourage students to take the writing section at least in places where students are thought to be given unfair advantages due to the sharing of old questions. I would go so far as to encourage schools get faculty to read the essay from the SAT as they are academic in nature and may help to predict academic success as well or better than the multiple choice questions. At the very least studies should be funded to look at how well the SAT essay predicts academic success. I do not expect schools will follow this proposal.For the last several years the number of colleges and universities that have gone test optio0nal has increased significantly. There are schools all over the US, many of them quite well known that no longer require applicants to submit SAT/ACT scores. I have written about this phenomenon before so I will not rehearse it all here. What I can predict, however, is that many more schools will go test optional in the coming years. First of all it increases the number of students who will apply to schools. This helps schools look more selective when making offers of admission and this in turn could help the rankings of the schools. More importantly, the schools may have less trust in the scores they receive and will, therefore, not put as much weight on them. For groups like Fairest and others who think the standardized test are pernicious this will comes as welcome news. For those who think that standardized tests, especially at the ends of the spectrum (very high testers and very low testers) are good predictors of academic success will be disappointed. Those who want to quantify students will also not be happy. Given that the new SAT is ties to the Common Core, those who support the Core will want the tests to remain a necessary part of evaluating schools ad students.At this point it may sound like I think the SAT is in big trouble and that its future is in jeopardy. While this may be true for some of the reasons I ‘ve listed and for some others as well. I do not think the issue with old questions being recycled will be the reason for its fall from being a common part of the admission process. In order for students to gain an advantage on the SAT by memorizing questions the students have to be incredibly focused and willing to devote many hours to the task. The answers student have require knowing the full question and the answer from many hundreds if not thousands of old questions. In other words, only incredibly motivated students can hope to get a significant advantage form memorizing old questions. While there is now a new SAT and the questions to memorize may not be as large as in the past, this will change within a year when at least 7 tests will be administered per year.It should come as no surprise that the places where the issue of test prep and access to prior questions are in Asia. The rote memorization of materials ahs long has been a part of the educations system. Students spend untold hours memorizing materials for their own national exams. What many may not realize then is that these students are in fact cramming for the tests by memorizing the tests. This in and of itself requires a great deal of time and effort. The other piece of information about many of these students is that they are, in many cases bright students. For example, many students in China who take the SAT could score well above 2000 on the old SAT and above 1400 on the new test. These score while near the top percentages of all testers are low for China. In recent years student who are accepted to top schools in the US typical have 800 math scores and well above 700 on both the critical reading and writing sections of the SAT. There are hundreds of student scoring very well on the Sat and it is not only because they have access to old questions; rather, it is that they have studies hard to for tests all of their lives and are prepared to do well on the test anyway. The competition for getting into top US schools –which admit only small numbers of applicants from China and Korea—is so fierce that student are willing to devote tremendous effort to improve their scores. So far as I have seen there are not many students in the US who are ready to devote their summers to attending SAT camps that require 12 or more hours of SAT prep per day. Some students from Asia see that they need nearly perfect scores to be admitted to top schools and therefore age willing to do this. It may be that there are others around the world and in the US who are willing to put in the effort to memorize everything on tests, but the overall percentage will be small. Will this small percentage undermine the credibility of the whole tests? Not likely. Some admission officers have already said that they look at scores from student in some places with a jaded eye. In other words a student with a great score in China will not be looked at the same as a student with a great score from Iowa. It is unlikely however that most schools will not expect the majority of their students who will be offered admission to submit scores and that most will assume the scores are accurate.If I were a VC and I was looking for a new investment opportunity that has the potential to solve the problems with test security, I would look around for someone to create a test like the PISA exam or even the Gaokao which would be given once a year. The test would, however, not have a mean score like the SAT/ACT. In other words, the test results would not be compared to other version of the test given in other years. The test would be used t show how students did on a particular test. This test could be used as a substitute for the SAT or in addition to the SAT. I realize I am opening myself to a deluge of critical comments as many educators feel students are living in a standardized test culture and adding one more would only make things worse. It may make things worse for some but for those who need to prove that the results of their tests are accurate it may help the students and the colleges too.The pragmatist in me believes that in the world of admission most students and schools will muddle on with the tests that are out there and that the concern for test security will not undermine the use of the tests so along as they are tied to secondary school and college rankings. I have been wrong about a lot of things before so I will see how this looks a few years from now.

(VERY long answer below, read at your own risk)Well, the thing is, most universities in Turkey are unnecessarily hard and the worse thing is that this neither reflects to nor is the cause of a high education quality. In fact, I don’t find the education in most universities including METU off-puttingly hard, the things that make it hard for a student is the stuff that you’d imagine to be trivially simple in universities around the world but that is not so in Turkey.I’m a third year computer engineering student in METU and I’ve spent my last semester in exchange in Aalto University in Finland. While studying there I had the chance to observe and confirm some things I already had an idea about how universities in Turkey work (!) differently than those in other countries. Here are some of those:The infrastructure of Turkish universities is a mess filled with many unnecessary and complicated bureaucracies, and I’ll exemplify that by comparing the course registration procedures in METU and Aalto.In METU (and probably most of universities in Turkey):The course registration takes place between the Wednesday and Friday of the week just before the lectures start. You need to decide on which courses you want to take (OH WAIT you don’t really have too many options with that, I’ll come to that in the following sections), see if there are any conflicts between the lecture hours of the courses, etc. You know, the regular stuff (note that this is a very cumbersome procedure in METU, again I’ll cover that later). EXCEPT the information you’d require such as lecture days and hours, the professors giving the courses, etc. might not be put into the system even until the Tuesday night. So, for one reason or another, most students enter the registration system on Wednesday morning without a clear idea of what they will do.Another thing is that the registration system opens gradually (9 AM for 4th+ year students, 10 for 3rd year, 11 for 2nd, 12 for 1st). This might seem to be a good way of ensuring that the students who will “potentially” graduate at the end of the year can take their courses without any problems. However, this causes the capacity of these courses to be filled by those who had access to the system before you. Normally this wouldn’t be a problem since departments would estimate how many students would take the course based on previous years and adjust the capacity accordingly, right? WRONG! For some reason, departments in METU love to give their courses way less capacity compared to the demand. I remember on my first year I needed to take a chemistry course that almost every engineering student in METU is required to take; initially I couldn’t register to the course because the capacity was full. Upon talking with the department they later increased the capacity of the course so I could register. So, my question is, WHY THE FUCK would you not give more capacity to the course in the first place? It doesn’t make any sense!However, when it comes to the course registration problems that METU students face, this would only be the tip of the iceberg. If you want to repeat any courses that you either failed or want to increase your grade of, good luck talking with millions of secretaries and professors and filling out folders of files so that they allow you to take the course again. Another specific example that comes to my mind is that since many departments are too crowded student-wise, most courses are divided into different sections. These sections have different professors, lecture days and hours, lecture halls, etc. and the most common way to split students into sections is to divide them by their surname. For example, if a course has 2 sections, maybe those whose surnames begin within AA-JZ can register to the first one and others (KA-ZZ) can register to the second one. So in this scenario I would be allowed to only register to the second section, but what if another course’s lecture hours conflict with the 2nd section but not with the 1st one? I might get away with being registered to the 2nd section but attending to the 1st one, but what if attendance is taken or there are in-class quizzes that differ between sections? Then I would need to be registered to the 1st section but I can’t because the system doesn’t allow me to. So again I would need to beg to my department and fill out forms that require tens of signatures from people that are never in their offices. Eventually the department would manually change my registration to the 1st section, but trust me, all these bureaucracy mentally tires you.Finally, after getting things sorted to some extent which you’re somewhat satisfied with, you need to have your registration approved by the professor that is your departmental advisor. This year, they changed the system such that after the approval you cannot make any changes to your registration. Say, on the noon of Friday you did the approval and went back home, and there was a course you wanted to take but for some reason you coudn’t. It is completely possible that the restriction that prevented you from taking the course is lifted an hour after you did your approval. In order to take that course you need to go back to school, have your advisor lift the approval, register to the course and have your registration approved again. But the chances are there were many students who were in the same position as you but hadn’t done the approval yet and by the time you’d do all that stuff to get registered to the course the remaining course capacity would be filled by those students so you probably woudn’t be able to take the course anyway. Therefore you don’t even bother even though you know that if you did your registration an hour later you would have taken the course.After Friday 5 PM the registration is over, you cannot make any changes to your registration at all. A week after lectures begin, the add-drop period takes place. This is when you can make those changes but chances are nothing will change. If there is a course that you want to take whose capacity is full, unless you sit in front of the computer/phone and spam the system hoping that someone will drop the course you won’t be able to get it. Mind you that this takes place while the lectures are going on, so there’s no chance you’d be able to do that spam, so you end up feeling sad and hopeless again. After the add-drop period, you have no chance to register to other courses.In Aalto (and probably in most universities around the world):You login to the system, find the course, click register and that’s it. No capacity problems, no bullshit restrictions, no bureaucracy, no approvals, nothing! It is done with a single click! And even better, you can register to and unregister from courses anytime within the semester given that registration to that course is still open. When I see how easy things can be whereas we have to go through all the trouble and pain for probably the most elementary procedure in higher education, my envy grows more and more.More about the course registration restrictions: I’ve already mentionned the capacity problem, surname stuff and other issues, but the main things that take away any last piece of freedom of choosing the courses you want to take by yourself are the strict prerequisite system and departmental constraints.Normally, prerequisites are there for students to know what knowledge they should possess before taking a course. Those prerequisites are often given as concepts (e.g. linear algebra, statistical methods, data structures) and signify the recommended prior knowledge, which means a student can register to these courses even if they don’t know these concepts by learning those by themselves outside of class. This is not the case in Turkish universities. The prerequisite of a course, if there is any, is given as a set of courses that the student should get a passing grade from in order to be able to take that course. Except some courses, this makes completely no sense, and I’ll give an example of why that’s the case. Before going to Aalto I needed to find courses that have similar curricula to courses that I’d take in METU so that I can get exempted from those courses. I found an Operating Systems course in Aalto that had the same curriculum as the Operating Systems course in METU. I’ve talked with its professor in METU and he confirmed the similarity of curricula, meaning that I could get exempted from the course in METU if I took the one in Aalto. However, later in the form-filling procedures I was informed that if I hadn’t taken any of the prerequisite courses of a course that I would normally get exempted from in METU by taking the corresponding course in Aalto, I wouldn’t be allowed to do that (i.e. I wouldn’t be exempted even if I took the course in Aalto). In my case, the Operating Systems course in METU had the Computer Organization course as a prerequisite, which I hadn’t taken yet, whereas on the webpage of the Operating Systems course in Aalto there wasn’t any mention of any concept related to Computer Organization in its prerequisites. This means one of the two schools was bulshitting me, and it’s not hard to guess which one.This prerequisite stuff is probably the main reason why very few students in Turkish universities can graduate in 4 years. Say you failed a course in the spring semester of your first year, and there is a must course you need to take next year that has that course as a prerequisite. Most of the courses in METU are always offered on either the fall or the spring semester, not both. This means you won’t be able to take the course you failed in the fall semester of your second year, which means even if the second-year course is on the spring semester you wouldn’t be able to take it because you haven’t completed its prerequisite. What if that second-year course is the prerequisite of another must course, say course 1, and course 1 is the prerequisite of a course 2, all of which are only offered in spring semesters? The only way to complete all of those within 4 years is to take and successfully pass each one each year, so if you fail any of these courses at any point, your graduadion instantly gets delayed by a year. This is what we call a “prerequisite chain” and it is the bane of any university student in Turkey. This strict enforcement of prerequisites also prevents you from freely choosing the courses you want to take in a semester since your must courses practically become labeled as 1st/2nd/3rd/4th year fall/spring term courses as if you’re in high school all over again. The only remaining option of choosing your courses yourself is then the elective courses… or is it?There are different types of elective courses in METU and there is a number of each of those types that you need to take before graduating. There are technical/departmental electives that are advanced courses offered by your department, restricted electives that your faculty could force you to take whose topics are related to common concepts studied within the faculty (in my case Faculty of Engineering -> thermodynamics, fluid mechanics, statics, etc.), and nontechnical/nondepartmental electives that you can take from other departments and cover a wide range of topics (e.g. language and instrument courses, philosophy, history, economics, politics, etc.). The first two types of electives are limited in number of course options, so the freedom of choice comes from the nontechnical electives. The problem is, there is also a department constraint of each section of a course as well. Even if a course might be listed as one of the nontechnical elective courses that you can take, the department that offers the course might simply not make it available to your department (this also happens with restricted electives but since it is more of an issue of my department I won’t crtiticize it here). So your limited options get even more limited, and most students end up taking either a language or instrument course since those are always offered to all departments, even if they would be happier with a course that wasn’t offered to their department. Again as a comparison, I took a Machine Learning course in Aalto and there were like 600 students from tens of different departments registered to that course. In METU, the Machine Learning course is only offered to the Computer Engineering students as a technical elective, even though it is a trending field which students of many departments could be interested in.Okay, I think I’ve bored you enough with how messed up the infrastructure in Turkish universities is, but I haven’t actually answered what the question asks yet: the education! I’ll talk about that in two parts:First of all, the amount of must courses a METU student (and probably any student studying in a Turkish university) is supposed to take are… how to say it, just too many. We are forced to learn many overly specific concepts that we’ll pursue only one of, and we have no choice. As a computer engineering student in Turkey I’ve learned and will learn about signal processing, embedded systems, computer graphics, network protocols; which are Master’s topics themselves in many universities. So, as a Bachelor’s student, by the time I graduate I’ll have learned many advanced topics and I can only pursue one or maybe none of those if I want to continue studying for a Master’s. This is not unique to my department, it is a common characteristic of any department in any Turkish university, and in fact this is how education in Turkey is in all levels (e.g. a friend in high school studying for SAT told me that a sophomore high school student in Turkey could ace the SAT Physics-Chemistry-Biology with their current knowledge and same with SAT Maths as well if they also learned calculus, which is taugh in the senior year in Turkish high schools). When I told the people I met in Aalto how many courses I take as a Bachelor’s student they were very surprised and asked me if people tend to do Master’s on top of such an advanced Bachelor’s study. Ironically the answer is yes, because those advanced courses would actually be just the first-year courses in the related Master’s programmes and we earn nothing by taking the introduction courses to all different specialized research fields. Getting rid of those courses and some others in the Bachelor’s curriculum could even reduce its duration from 4 to 3 years, and then we can specialize in any field that we are interested in later by doing a Master’s, right? This is the conclusion one would reach using common sense, RIGHT? Then I welcome you to Turkey, the country where common sense doesn’t apply.The main difference I’ve observed that exists between Turkish universities and Aalto (and probably in universities around the world) is the academic staff’s approach to the students. In Turkey, the professors and especially the assistants don’t have a helpful mentality towards the students. They don’t have a straight hostile approach, but they mostly don’t care about how well the students learn the courses they teach. They are often academically quite unentushiastic and since they don’t actively strive for good quality in education they try to enforce learning by passive methods such as giving out difficult assignments and preparing hard exams. I’m not ideally against those, but if things are meant to be hard, they should be well-prepared as well and that’s where our academic staff fail. The assignments are mostly lackluster with unclear instructions and full of forced difficulty. The exams are a little bit better but there are often problems with grading and the curve system used to give the letter grades can be unfair in some cases. In Aalto, the assingments helped me learn more than the assignments I have in METU even though they were way easier, not because they were conceptually easier but rather they were prepared well and professionally. Students could get bonus points by completing tasks that could be as simple as answering a feedback questionnaire, and the academic staff overall seemed very positive towards helping the students get the best out of the courses they taught. For me, this is the most important difference that makes universities in Turkey hard and also lowers their education quality.In short, if a Turkish university and, say, a university in the EU which are of similar calibre are compared, I would say that Turkish universities are harder, even if they offer similar courses with similar content. The reason behind that is in universities in Turkey everything is the student’s responsibility; this includes handling bureaucracy, learning what’s taught in their courses, managing their responsibilities as a student, etc. In other universities around the world I would guess the school and the academic staff support and reward their students better since they need to retain their reputation within the academic world whereas in Turkey universities unfortunately don’t prioritize that as much. So, maybe what your students said wouldn’t exactly reflect the difficulty of education in METU (or in universities in Turkey in general) but rather the general life of a student.