<p>Why is everyone bashing the "AP crammers"? If a student can learn in two weeks what it takes most people 18-36 weeks to cover, then I say more power to them. Everybody that reads/posts on this forum is guilty of cramming and trying to coach the tests to some extent, so let's stop feigning outrage.</p>
<p>i have to totally agree with what eagle said, that's what i tried to get across in my post..</p>
<p>I havent read all the posts yet, but glucose, I fully agree with you. I was attacking the idea of this conformity BS. I did well on my SATs and some kid told me, "ya, basically the SAT is a test of conformity, so you're just good at conforming" with a serious expression. Of course, this makes no sense, and as I said before, doing the average would be the most conformist thing to do anyway.</p>
<p>Glucose, you misunderstood. I said taking APs wouldnt be conforming anyway, because conforming means doing the status quo, which is doing what most people do. I read in an article about APs, about 54-55% of those taking SATs have not taken APs or IB.</p>
<p>Ebonytear, Just read this article:
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A805-2005Apr19?language=printer%5B/url%5D">http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A805-2005Apr19?language=printer</a>
Basically, not to personally attack you, but your view is elitist and is the opposite of the experience of most students. Read the article and you will see what I am talking about.</p>
<p>My school has been considering >decreasing< the number of APs available because they don't want to hurt kids' chances of getting into a top tier school just because they didn't take 6-7 AP classes a year. (their logic is that if the AP classes are meant to be college level courses, people should be taken 4-5 maximum in any given year) In my opinion it's a legitimate theory....but it'll mean evening out the rigor of the classes, which isn't always a good thing...</p>
<p>"Why is everyone bashing the "AP crammers"? If a student can learn in two weeks what it takes most people 18-36 weeks to cover, then I say more power to them. Everybody that reads/posts on this forum is guilty of cramming and trying to coach the tests to some extent, so let's stop feigning outrage."</p>
<p>I don't know about other people, but I'm only "bashing" the people who "self-study" year-round when in fact all they did was learn the material in a matter of two weeks. AP crammers aren't that big of a deal; to a certain extent everyone "crams" before an AP test regardless. One thing about "extreme crammers" (who zone out all year and then study just learn the material a week before) is that most probably forget all of the material a few weeks later. Sure, that's fine, but the point of the class was to learn, not to take a test. </p>
<p>anyway,
I just think cramming for an AP test without taking the class is a complete abuse of the system. Since when do you take a final in college without taking the class first? That's not what they were meant to be.</p>
<p>i don't think it's an abuse of the "system" at all hunny..that's what you'll get in college, you'll learn bs, you'll take a book 3 weeks before finals, and read and teach yourself, don't talk about the system. I love "cramming" even though it's just studying at a later period, i mean wow you have to give a name "cramming."</p>
<p>The great thing about my Calc AB class was that we were taught to know math as being "beautiful", rather than "here's volumes by discs, remember it its gonna be on the FR" and so forth. Understanding that math truly is beautiful in how it fits and weaves in and out of itself really broadens my passion for mathematics. In fact, my teacher LOATHES the "Calculus Reform" tendency of modern AP Calc tests. Like all of the problems where it basically has you counting boxes to obtain an "integral" value. The true scam of the AP tests is what some people have touched upon here - it's knowing the design of the test rather than actually learning the material. As my teacher always states, a 3rd grader can count how many boxes are under a graph, but that doesn't mean he or she knows calculus. It's time for the AP Tests to get rid of all the phony crap (specifically in calculus) and keep the real stuff on there.</p>
<p>About the people who can cram in two weeks and get a 4 or a 5 on an AP test - when they take a higher level class in college they will most likely do really bad because they will be in a higher level course without really knowing their stuff. So I wouldn't worry too much about that.</p>
<p>I think the real scam of the AP Tests is the claim that CB is "non-profit". Please - $82 each, a few million students taking tests each year, and they don't have to remake MC problems basically ever. Rediculous. Even though ETS isn't non-profit, the whole monopoly on entrance into college is rediculous.</p>
<p>For whatever it's worth, many college exams (and certainly most grad/prof school exams) are given in such a way that a person could be absent the entire semester, show up for the test, and pass.</p>
<p>If you really want to learn anything in this world, you have to teach yourself. To work in a theme from a different thread, Einstein and Newton didn't become Einstein and Newton because they let someone teach them. They actively sought and digested knowledge on their own.</p>
<p>A person who actually wants to learn something useful and true is probably better off skipping college and moving to a city with good libraries. The point of college is to get a degree that will impress people (future employers, family members, strangers at parties). Before you object to this, ask yourself why every college in America grants degrees--the only purpose of a degree is to show it to someone else later on as proof that you completed a course of study.</p>
<p>I'm not saying that people don't go to college for reasons besides getting a degree. I myself didn't go because I was interested in a degree, and neither did my friends. But a college itself exists to generate degrees and certify that its graduates have satisfied its requirements. Otherwise it would have no grading system and offer no degree, like the original Academy of old.</p>
<p>While I doubt that the AP people set out to mimic the flaws in higher education by designing a program that's very susceptible to cramming, the fact remains that cramming is not only possible in college but tacitly encouraged. If it gets you past an AP exam too, well--that's just the way things are.</p>
<p>I'm not gonna say what school I go to, but I am biased because I attend on of the aformentioned "exeter" type schools.. In our entire school we have two AP classes, now those aren't even geared toward the ap exams they are just called advanced _______ because thats what you take after you finished basic chem or physics and you want to go futher. But most kids who are interested in chem or phys skip the advanced class and do a TOPICs with the teacher where they go 1-1 and learn what they want. maybe its biochem or astrophysics, somthing not normally offered. Anyways i think its incredibly dumb to have an ap curriculum that is supposed to be taught, teachers like certain things, and they are going to focus and be very enthusiastic about subjects they love. My chem teacher loves equilibrium, so we went way in depth into that, solving problems that I doubt anyone here could do (no offense, no one in his sections understood them until he solved them for us, they were literally impossible, 5 unknowns solved by probablity and guessing). We didn't cover a lot of stuff on the AP exam because he didn't like them, for example we covered reaction rates in a day. There is no point in standardizing courses, that would compeltely ruin the point of school, hell why not send everyone a CD with a course on it. Follow the instructor on your screen for a year and then take an exam.... your not learning, your memorizing. Standardized testing in and of itself is a complete joke, they say it measures apptitude, so why not give us an IQ test? The main thing SATs and APs do is get you to is to memeorize facts and strategies, bascially booksmarts. Eventually people will realize that booksmarts get you absolutly no where in this world, people become so dependent on learning what is right. AP literature is a perfect example, you ask someone what they think about a passage, they relate it to similar stories they have read and apply those meanings to this new passage. They agree with sparknotes, the majority of students in those classes can't come up with a meaning on thier own, they think there is only one correct answer. Whats worse is that the AP lit exam tests you this way, for the essays there is only ONE correct answer the graders are looking for (the popular one). What we need are more school that teach critical thinking, and that is something that can't be measured through a test, but only through a classroom.</p>
<p>"If you really want to learn anything in this world, you have to teach yourself. To work in a theme from a different thread, Einstein and Newton didn't become Einstein and Newton because they let someone teach them. They actively sought and digested knowledge on their own."</p>
<p>I pretty much agree with that statement. I taught myself HTML and Photoshop and I remember a good amount of it still today. Anything you teach yourself is something you really love or are interested in, so naturally you'll know it better.</p>
<p>i took general chem 1 and 2 at my community college which were of course worth college credits. I can certainly tell you that the classes adn tests were much easier than the ap chem test. I crammed for most of the tests and managed to pull off a 95 (which by the way gets rounded to an A, no number grades like in HS). Therefore, I can conclude that college is no harder than HS. In fact, many of the classes are comparatively easier becaues you're not under the added stress of the millions of other things your forced to do in HS.</p>
<p>I think that this question raises broader issues about the very nature of the educational system. Middle class society is based on the premise that kids need to go to college, pass, and obtain degrees in order to have successful lives. As a result, education becomes a "mass production" industry. Everyone needs to get As and Bs in high school, everyone needs to make it through college, and we end up obscuring the entire idea of higher education.</p>
<p>The posters in this thread who are criticizing AP tests are idealists. They want to believe that college really involves deeper, more meaningful study than the AP curriculum provides. I don't blame them - but, unfortunately, if you're attending the typical school (although I understand many people on CC aren't), your first year chemistry course is unlikely to probe much deeper than an AP course. You'll be thrown into a lecture hall, taught by a TA who doesn't really want to be there, and end up cramming for the final so that you can receive an A. In other words, your experience will seem suspiciously similar to the caricature of AP classes that is so prevalent in this thread.</p>
<p>I'm not going to deny that AP tests are easy. I'm not going to deny that they're shallow. Believe me - I'll be finishing my run of 10 tests tomorrow, and I certainly understand the flaws in AP testing. However, AP tests are coming to symbolize a much broader issue in American education - an issue that, frankly, I don't know how to resolve.</p>
<p>Our school board recently decided that high schools in the district should eliminate entrance requirements for AP classes. After all, now that studies have demonstrated that students at all levels of aptitude will be better prepared for college if they take AP classes, we couldn't possibly deny anyone that opportunity, could we? Making AP classes standard fare would seem to imply that regular courses aren't good enough even for mediocre students - but, somehow, this doesn't seem to cause much apprehension.</p>
<p>There's an important issue that everyone wants to dance around: by and large, "higher education" in America is a sham. If you come from the right culture, you are expected to attend college, even if you have never expressed an independent thought in your life. You will be shoved through shallow first-year survey courses, courses that are designed precisely for a student of your temperament - the same courses that the College Board designs its program around.</p>
<p>And so I'm off, in the grand but lamentable tradition of cramming, to study for micro and macroeconomics, tests for which I have neither taken a class nor read a book (until now). May the gods of proper education have pity upon my corrupt soul...</p>
<p>The problem is that many people on this board assume that they are more mastered on a subject than they really are. You can tell when you are going to do good because you can bend the material to your will. You can explain everything, and teach your class backwards and forwards. I self-studied AP Calculus BC this year, and I believe I knew the material better than 99%(there is one genius) percent of the seniors takign it. WHy? Because I understand that Calculus is not just a subject, but is the Calculus, as mathematical perspective on change that accurately describes the world. Furthermore, if you can prove every theorem, you really know what you are doing.</p>
<p>The AP Exams are exams. I don't care how you prepare for em, but as long as you pass em, you are fine. If I had time, I would argue for the suckiness of them. But I don't have time. I have a goal, and I am going to meet it. If it means taking a few exams to place myself on the leader board, then so be it.</p>
<p> I read some article on CC that said that the competitiveness will increase until the class of 2009 or something like that, after which it will level off. Anyone have a link to that article?</p>
<p>Its carrying capacity! The population will increase only so much until all the resources run out and we plateau. </p>
<p>Whoa whoa whoa! Guys, just because you are learning to take the test doesn't mean you aren't learning the subject. So what if teachers teach in order to familiarize their students with AP format? Did you learn something from the reactions questions? Did you learn anything during titrations? Learn anything during thermochemistry? I'm sure you did. Did the teacher teach towards the AP Test? I'm sure he/she did.</p>
<p>Im not blaming anyone for the formal charge thing. Im just saying that because the teacher thought it wasnt on the AP test it was suddenly not important. Thus, you arent really learning the subject. Youre learning specific parts of it that are deemed more important than others by random people. AP Physics C people, barely half of the topics were covered on the actual test. Instead of learning the entire, comprehensive class you would get your first year of college you get this specialized course geared toward the test. For example: you dont learn cylindrical shells in AP b/c theyre not on the test. You do in college. So, no, you DO NOT get the actual college class. But again, this DEPENDS ON WHICH COLLEGE YOU ATTEND. It may be different at lower level schools (not to be offending) like UCI or Colorado-Boulder. </p>
<p>Furthermore, AP classes and schools in general (I would hope) encourages knowledge and enjoyment of learning. However, sometimes this "enjoyment" can be overridden by stress to make the grade. It doesn't matter if its an AP class or not. Do you know what can solve this? By getting rid of the grades all together. No pass/fail. No ABCDF's. No anything. Not for CP, Honors, or AP classes. Would this work? Nope. You not enjoying the class isn't AP's problem. Its your problem. I know I've enjoyed all of my AP classes so far.</p>
<p>No, because in order to be competitive, you have to take AP classes in subjects you dislike. And dont you agree that if everything were not geared toward an exam that occurs almost a month before some schools end, there would be less stress on 1) the teacher to get good AP scores, and 2) the teacher to get through all the material in time, and 3) on you to learn all the material in time. You dont have to get rid of grades all together. I think you are misconstruing my argumentation. From the LOAD of AP classes I mean, come one, in college how many credits do you usually take? Maybe 25 maximum? Thats 5 classes and thats considered a freaking large course load for colleges. People take 7 AP classes a year if the courses are as great as you say, then itd be a huge course load. This means unless you are a super genius, you cant do it and you have to resort to cheating, skimping on this subject, skimping on that one, and overall not learning the concepts well enough because you have too much on your plate. And that translates into an overall bad impression of the subject matter and as the article someone so aptly quoted said, "He showed up every day ready to learn, to contribute, and to have a good time in the process. I believe this is how AP ought to work." The AP teacher praised a kid who loved learning, who was ready to have fun in the AP class. But thats not what AP is doing anymore! Its a tool of competition, and if you take like 7 AP I doubt you will have as much enthusiasm. So its great that you get advanced classes that challenge people but cant you do that without AP? And make it even better? More interesting? So instead of getting crappy college credit, you know 75% of the stuff in Freshman Chemistry and can Ace it and learn to love it at the same time? Thats def. better and thats why colleges are severing credit for AP. And for the people who generally take AP not trying to be elitist here but they would not have as much stress to make the grade in CP or honors because, gasp, CP is easier! AP is, as many people have said in the forum, hard and advanced. So the stress to make the grade is multiplied by the difficulty in making the grade. CP Calc I wouldve breezed. I had to labor nightly over AP. </p>
<p>"Why is everyone bashing the "AP crammers"? If a student can learn in two weeks what it takes most people 18-36 weeks to cover, then I say more power to them." + and the idealist argument</p>
<p>this is my response. I am one of them; and I dislike the system. it's my freedom to do so, although you my deem my views 'idealistic' important ideas were always 'idealistic' for their times. William Llyod Garrison? Idealistic. Psh, we'll never get rid of slavery. Blackwell? Galileo? All idealists. If you are content with the status quo, with humanity and society as it is, you are the people who stagnate society, and force it to lag behind. There is always room for improvement, and even if said improvement is 'impossible' (like going to the Moon, or flying, my gosh, that can NEVER be done') the discussion and discourse that is spouted is educational and absolutely integral to any further improvements. </p>
<p>And no, no power to them because college classes are cumulative. Esp. if you are looking to major in a science, you need a solid foundation a years worth that you can actually remember rather than a crammed 2 week session, after which these crammers either force everything out or forget it all. Then youre screwed for upper division courses. </p>
<p>The tests for the class are 'crammable' and they do not teach you everyting about the topic. That is not the point. It makes sense to me to test out of these classes and then get to the more specific and interesting classes.</p>
<p>And once you get into those more specific and interesting classes after passing w/ AP credit (assuming the college takes it) then you are lost. There was an article from a guy who took 14 AP s and got 5s on all of them, and skipped to 2nd year Bio at his college and forced himself back to Bio 1 because the breadth and depth of the material covered in college totally outmatched the AP and he did not understand a thing in Bio 2. So no, you dont get into those classes because you fail them cuz they are taught in a sequence, so you have to take Bio 1 again anyway what a waste of money!</p>
<p>"The true scam of the AP tests is what some people have touched upon here - it's knowing the design of the test rather than actually learning the material." that's from the article you quoted.</p>
<p>Elitist? I may live in the OC but I have nowhere near as much money as my neighbors. In fact, I qualify for full need-based scholarships, from every college. Yeah, you may argue that its good because it forces some schools to be advanced. But couldnt we force schools to teach advanced material without the standardized testing? Yes. And that would be better because standardized testing can never cover the breadth and depth of college mid-terms and finals.
Basically, not to personally attack you, but your view is elitist and is the opposite of the experience of most students. Read the article and you will see what I am talking about. I made a disclaimer it depends on what college you go to. I specified upper tier. So maybe thats elitist. Whatever. And the fact that there are a) people who are changing and b) colleges are depending and caring less and less about AP and c) people agree with my position demonstrate that most people have this experience! I still think that these schools can be encouraged (with federal grant money from worthless No Child Left Behind, oh, oops thats not getting its grant money either
) to teach advanced courses but not to standardized tests or with those narrow course guidelines in mind. </p>
<p>i don't think it's an abuse of the "system" at all hunny..that's what you'll get in college, you'll learn bs, you'll take a book 3 weeks before finals, and read and teach yourself, don't talk about the system. I love "cramming" even though it's just studying at a later period, i mean wow you have to give a name "cramming."</p>
<p>Yes. But once again. Classes are created in a sequence. And are cumulative. You have to learn some of the material along the way or youll never graduate. Or have to switch majors. About the people who can cram in two weeks and get a 4 or a 5 on an AP test - when they take a higher level class in college they will most likely do really bad because they will be in a higher level course without really knowing their stuff. So I wouldn't worry too much about that. Yeah, I totally agree with that.</p>
<p>Therefore, I can conclude that college is no harder than HS. In fact, many of the classes are comparatively easier becaues you're not under the added stress of the millions of other things your forced to do in HS.</p>
<p>No offense, but that was community college. I took chem. at my JC too, and it was also easy. Experiences at more rigorous centers of learning will definitely disprove your statement. It all depends on which college. </p>
<p>but is the Calculus, as mathematical perspective on change that accurately describes the world. Furthermore, if you can prove every theorem, you really know what you are doing. Even self-study is better. Because you enjoy learning, and are self-motivated = hence you know it better. AP classes force competition and AP exams force narrow-perspective that totally turns people off learning and subjects, as well as encouraging cramming and cheating and all sorts of other bad habits.</p>
<p>i agree. its a waste of time and money. Im taking the 8th AP of my high school career tommorow and i think the tests are ********. You dont learn ANYTHING, because its all, "Oh the test doesnt test that, so even though the class actually cares about learnign this we cant" and then you pay $ 97 to take the tests, and they are like, "yay you get a 5" but you never learnt anything. and yes i'm going into college wiht 51 credits but so what? Most of them are for classes i wouldnt have had to take anywyas, and i want to have a fulfilling college career, not fail in upper level classes because i skipped out of the lower division ones. I'm upset that i've put as much effort and money as i have into nothing.</p>
<p>u know what, maybe you're smart. or maybe you know the material well. or maybe you've worked hard all year, and by "cram" you mean you reviewed only 2-3 days. </p>
<p>There's no way you can hang around and cram/study 2-3 days and pass.</p>
<p>vaish:
you complain now that you've finished testing. If you don't want to fail in upper class courses, start from the intro courses, and you'll be way ahead of others. And you know what, think of the people who are reading tons of material in 1.5 months. Can't you pay $80 for them, the paper, the proctors, the testmakers, and the security personnels?</p>
<p>Yes thank you, I am smart. I know that. but i'm not smart enough to do what i've gone and get the scores i have. there is something wrong here. And i actually am planning on taking the intro classes but i feel like i wasted so much time and effort on nothing. if i was taking the 101 class anyways why did i come home from prom at 12 last year to get enough sleep for the writing test that monday? i feel like i could have actually learnt in classes rather than stressing about "will this be on the test" i just feel like i could have had a much richer time in hs without them. i totally feel that the poor teachers reading the essays deserve the $ but really why does anyone go to the trouble.?
[quote]
There's no way you can hang around and cram/study 2-3 days and pass
[/quote]
i do and i this is my 3rd yr doing it. by cram i mean going to a couple review sessions and maybe looking over some practice problems the night before</p>
<p>I'd like to say I agree with all of you.<br>
(^o^)V</p>
<p>Anyway, it's fun beating the "game," too. The other dilemma is that even after taking Honors Chem and AP Chem, for example, you probably wanna take Chem I (or intro) just to raise your GPA, which makes the AP test/ credit you would've gotten, useless.<br>
Even about 3 years ago, even in THIS forum, taking 6+ APs was not all that common, but now look around you! ALmost everyone's cramming their schedule to get the most # of APs. I liked pushing myself by doing the same thing, but as a general trend... Idk. Why do i always feel like i'm contradicting myself...</p>