I notice many students taking this course and say it's easy. Can this course be a substitution for other math courses (since the pre-reqs are math 12, math 100, or 151, etc)?
I notice many students taking this course and say it's easy. Can this course be a substitution for other math courses (since the pre-reqs are math 12, math 100, or 151, etc)?
It may or may not be easy. If taught properly, it certainly will not be. If you get Pearce, it will be quite difficult, but useful.
Also, graph theory is not supposed to be in there (unless you have time). JC Liu teaches it because he likes graph theory, at the expense of the actual important and useful content. I would strongly advise against taking it with him.
It should be about: combinatorics, logic, proofs, set theory, finite state machines.
I took it but I don't know if it is considered easy or not because I didn't really study for it. As Phil stated above, proofs are VERY important if you want to survive in MACM 201. I had 101 with Bulatov and he was somewhat hard to understand because of his accent.
man, I am a bit worried I am going to die in 201. My 101 teacher was... uh.. not of the greatest quality, to say the least... And I got a C or C- in it.
Well, 201 is much harder than 101. Some of it is related, lots of it isn't (although you should know Combinatorics/Counting). Don't fret if you don't really understand how to solve recurrence relations and, most importantly, generating functions.
Most people totally flop that part. Your reward for getting through that is getting to the Graph Theory, which is somewhat more intuitive.
I dunno Phil, I had JC Liu and I thought he was a good prof. I got an A in his class. When it came time for 201 I didn't have a problem there, I ended up getting a B+ and now that I am in 316 I am still not having problems. Even though 316 is that well related to the previous two.
Inductive proofs are possibly the most important thing you learn in 101. Professors in higher level courses just assume that you know how to prove things inductively. They say things like "you can prove that by induction" and just expect that you'll know what they mean.
I don't know how anyone could even have the word easy in the same sentence with MACm 101. The class averages for the two midterms were 40% and 30%, and probably two-thirds of the class is failing the course right now.
I don't know how anyone could even have the word easy in the same sentence with MACm 101. The class averages for the two midterms were 40% and 30%, and probably two-thirds of the class is failing the course right now.
Hmmm...my macm101 class had an average of around 69-73, and our final exam was around the 70-ish mark. It was the highest the professor has seen in all his years of teaching, so sometimes the professor can or cannot make a difference.
Now CMPT250 on the other hand, holy fuck is that course hard.
Hmmm...my macm101 class had an average of around 69-73, and our final exam was around the 70-ish mark. It was the highest the professor has seen in all his years of teaching, so sometimes the professor can or cannot make a difference.
Now CMPT250 on the other hand, holy fuck is that course hard.
man, I am pretty lost in that class (250), and struggle to keep my eyes open each lecture (due mostly to sleeping trouble, not boredom), but my second midterm mark was in like the top 15% or so of the class. Too bad assignment marks are worth so much, because I sure as hell am not doing well on the assignments.
Hmmm...my macm101 class had an average of around 69-73, and our final exam was around the 70-ish mark. It was the highest the professor has seen in all his years of teaching, so sometimes the professor can or cannot make a difference.
Now CMPT250 on the other hand, holy fuck is that course hard.
Is it with Dixon? If so, then yeah hes boring. But his notes are godsend. I didn't read the book when I took it with him though lol.
I did ENSC 250 instead of CMPT 250 and I think that was a good choice.
Can this be substituted? If so, I didn't know that. Shit shit shit.
You're lucky EricJ. I kind of know my stuff but for some reason the exams aren't really related to the book. I got above average for my first midterm and fucked up terribly for my second one. I just want to pass, and my GPA is taking a huge beating this semester. :cry:
Is it with Dixon? If so, then yeah hes boring. But his notes are godsend. I didn't read the book when I took it with him though lol.
Yeah it is. I don't think he's boring, the course materials is boring. His notes are good, but they're really simplistic.
You don't want to substitute MATH100 for MACM101 (not that you can).
If you even passed MATH12, MATH100 will be a breeze. It's MATH12 without the graphing calculator, but in return the questions are way easier. However, the class average for MATH100 seems to be a C- almost always... I'm guessing it's because a bunch of the students (Arts students probably) never took MATH12 before cause it seems impossible to do worse in MATH100. MATH100 doesn't even have the combinatorics, probability and statistics sections that they teach in MATH12 (Arguably the hardest sections in MATH12 that they're in whole different courses, STAT270 and MACM201 both of which are also required by CS majors... *sigh*).
MACM101 is pretty fair up until Integers, Combinatorics, Languages and Grammar, and SMDs. That stuff really screws you over. Don't take it unless you're a CS or MATH major...
Comments
Also, graph theory is not supposed to be in there (unless you have time). JC Liu teaches it because he likes graph theory, at the expense of the actual important and useful content. I would strongly advise against taking it with him.
It should be about: combinatorics, logic, proofs, set theory, finite state machines.
The curriculum can be found here:
http://www.cs.sfu.ca/CC/curriculum/macm.html
Phil
My 101 teacher was... uh.. not of the greatest quality, to say the least... And I got a C or C- in it.
Most people totally flop that part. Your reward for getting through that is getting to the Graph Theory, which is somewhat more intuitive.
Phil
Thanks for the replies, I will consider taking this course if I can't find any other suitable courses.
Now CMPT250 on the other hand, holy fuck is that course hard.
Too bad assignment marks are worth so much, because I sure as hell am not doing well on the assignments.
Phil
You're lucky EricJ. I kind of know my stuff but for some reason the exams aren't really related to the book. I got above average for my first midterm and fucked up terribly for my second one. I just want to pass, and my GPA is taking a huge beating this semester. :cry: Yeah it is. I don't think he's boring, the course materials is boring. His notes are good, but they're really simplistic.
If you even passed MATH12, MATH100 will be a breeze. It's MATH12 without the graphing calculator, but in return the questions are way easier. However, the class average for MATH100 seems to be a C- almost always... I'm guessing it's because a bunch of the students (Arts students probably) never took MATH12 before cause it seems impossible to do worse in MATH100. MATH100 doesn't even have the combinatorics, probability and statistics sections that they teach in MATH12 (Arguably the hardest sections in MATH12 that they're in whole different courses, STAT270 and MACM201 both of which are also required by CS majors... *sigh*).
MACM101 is pretty fair up until Integers, Combinatorics, Languages and Grammar, and SMDs. That stuff really screws you over. Don't take it unless you're a CS or MATH major...