<p>How do they compare? What are the differences, positives, and negatives?</p>
<p>To earn a Brown diploma it is necessary to complete concentration requirements, a writing competency requirement, and pass at least 30 courses. Columbia, among other things, requires the completion of a set of core courses. But all this is on their websites, so certainly you know that.</p>
<p>I cannot say that either is positive or negative. It all depends on the student. </p>
<p>If a student needs discipline to be told what to study, then a core curriculum would probably be better for that student than an open curriculum. If a student is better at reading a map than drawing a map of their own, then a core curriculum is probably more suitable. </p>
<p>If a student can handle the pressure and responsibility of having a large degree of freedom in choosing courses, an open curriculum can be beneficial. If a student has diverse areas of interest, an open curriculum may be more suitable.</p>
<p>But I have often thought…I am in the minority here…that the difference doesn’t matter that much for those who are fans of the core. Choose the school that is the better fit regardless of the curriculum style. Each of the courses that comprises the Columbia core has its counterpart at Brown. If the Columbia core really is a selling point, it can be replicated at Brown. </p>
<p>Unless, of course, a student does not have the discipline to replicate the core without the rules saying it must be done.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>True, I guess, you could somewhat replicate the Columbia core classes at Brown, but not really the core experience. A major part of the core experience, I think, is sharing it with your classmates. You’re all going through it together. It leads to a wider audience of discussion on more common subjects. My niece recently graduated from Columbia, and as an underclassman she said she was a bit alarmed by the large number of fellow art history majors moving through the same classes together. </p>
<p>At Brown, you want get that as much. Even within the same concentration, students can have radically different academic approaches and experiences. My daughter is a freshman there, but has only met one other freshman that kind of, sorta, but not really, is on her similar academic path. Her friend group has radically different academic and extracurricular interests. </p>
<p>Those are two good data points based on two of your relatives’ experiences.</p>
<p>Not a big deal, but it is unclear to me why the Columbia niece was alarmed by people moving through the same core classes together, especially since it is claimed that this is a major (positive?) part of the experience. I am surprised that this apparently turned out to be a surprise.</p>
<p>And at Brown, I agree it is common for circles of friends to have different academic and extracurricular interests. But I am not sure that this is unique to Brown, and would need more evidence before I could concur that it is a special Brown characteristic. (I am thinking of the Yale residential colleges and Princeton eating clubs for example)</p>
<p>As for the statement that “True, I guess, you could somewhat replicate the Columbia core classes at Brown”, I would be interested to know what Columbia core classes couldn’t be fully replicated at Brown.</p>
<p>For applicants who think the core subjects would be worthwhile to study, and who also think the Brown experience would be ideal for them, I say, you can satisfy both objectives at Brown.</p>
<p>@fenwaypark @arwarw So guys, isn’t just this existence of the Core good in itself? For example, would I be able to take random classes at Harvard or Yale or Princeton? No, right? All classes taken there would have to be related to my major, correct?</p>
<p>And thus, I pose another question. Aren’t they both better than HYP in that sense? Because, whether lib arts is forced upon you (Columbia) or given to you (Brown), at least you have the opportunity to try these things, right?</p>
<p>Is my analysis correct? Or are these things possible at HYP too?</p>
<p>I am too lazy to check the HYP websites which would provide the answers to your questions. Nevertheless, I would be surprised if, for any college, all courses have to be related to the major or concentration. In any case, a quick check of a few websites will give you the answers you need.</p>
<p>Let us know what you find!</p>
<p>I cannot say that Brown is better than HYP or Columbia, or HYP and Columbia are better than Brown. It all depends on the individual.</p>
<p>@fenwaypark Yeah that makes sense, but I don’t know, from what I think, I don’t think you can. Anyone else want to weigh in on this?</p>
<p>
Wrong. You can take random classes at all three. HYP all have distribution requirements, but they are somewhat more flexible than Columbia. At Columbia, as an example, all students take Lit Hum; at Harvard, part of the gen ed requirements is a course in Aesthetic and Interpretive Understanding, but there are many options from which to choose.</p>
<p>I’m not saying one is better than they other; they are just different, and different students will be attracted to these at different levels.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@Ib43823 Don’t take our word for it. Confirm for yourself. It would take all of 2 minutes to google. Electives are liberally offered at most all colleges.</p>
<p>@fenwaypark I think a primary appeal of the core is a shared experience of an entire class reading and discussing the same texts at the same time. Even if one could ‘fully replicate’ all the Columbia core classes at Brown (and who the heck would do that?) one would still be missing the point. </p>
<p>@arwarw Then why is Columbia Core good by any means? If you are unable to take the electives you want, what is the point - especially if all the other colleges allow you to take electives you want? </p>
<p>@skieurope Then, why is the Columbia core appealing at all? And how is what harvard has different from brown?</p>
<p>One other thing about the core at Columbia to consider: as far as I understand it from my son’s friends who attend, you’re assigned to the core classes, you don’t get to choose the instructor, and often they are taught by grad TAs. The core curriculum is handled differently at uchicago, where all of the courses for the core are taught by profs and there is flexibility in choice of courses to fulfill the core requirements. My son at brown at the end was choosing between uchicago, penn and brown. He dropped penn bc it was too pre-professional. He loved the ethos, culture, student bodies at uchicago and brown, and although he’s a stem kid, he equally loves the humanities, and so he did create for himself at brown a curriculum that approximates what he would have gotten at uchicago. He ultimately chose brown bc it has the concentration he wanted, neuroscience, and the dept is a leading dept in the country, whereas Chicago doesn’t offer a neuroscience major. He would have majored in biology and taken neuro courses later as a specialization within the major. What all this goes to show is that it’s good to figure out what you’re interested in to the extent you can as a high school student. And to understand how comfortable you’ll be as the architect of your own curriculum. Some ppl just need a lot more structure and others love the freedom to chart their own course.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think lots of students would and do choose to take language courses, literature courses, science courses, and international culture courses (shorthand for Columbia core curriculum) outside their concentration at Brown. Can’t prove it, don’t have stats. Maybe others can comment. RenaissanceMom already has, in the context of UChicago</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>EDIT: I have seen the Columbia material referring to the “entire class” talking about the same subject. But I was always confused by that. They can’t be referring to all 1400 freshmen discussing stuff together, can they? And students enrolled in a particular individual class discussing stuff together seems common enough at most schools. How many people does one need to discuss classwork with to make the collaborative experience special? Five? Twenty? Hundreds? </p>
<p>
Going back to my earlier example of Lit Hum (Masterpieces of European Literature and Philosophy), all Columbia College freshman take this class. Fu students choose between Lit Hum and Contemporary Civilization. So it’s not all 1400+ students taking Lit Hum at the same time, but it is a good chunk of them. The course follows a common syllabus with common exams, but there are about 60 sections offered (of which the students ability to select is limited and the instructor’s name is not revealed in advance). So while it is not 1400 students sitting together in an auditorium, most students are going through the process together.</p>
<p>@lb43823 Harvard’s gen ed requirements are less restrictive than Columbia, but there is still a gen ed requirement. Brown has no gen ed requirement, although students often design their own. Again, what works for one student may not for another.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s a time-tested, meticulously designed program of deep learning set in one of the greatest cities in the world, and it’s served many, many students very well.</p>
<p>Bearing the responsibility of designing and constantly adjusting your own curriculum at Brown is not easy; it can be very stressful.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, of course, students take courses outside of their concentration, but I wouldn’t say that’s shorthand for the Columbia core. It’s really hard for me to imagine Brown students (based on the few I’ve met) comparing Brown’s offerings to Columbia’s Core to figure out how they can best replicate it? </p>
<p>See RenaissanceMom’s post.</p>
<p>(I didn’t say students taking courses outside their concentration was shorthand for Columbia core. I said my quick description of the four basic elements of the Columbia core was shorthand for Columbia core. It is there for us all to re-read if necessary, it is just a few posts up)</p>
<p>Anyway, I am not sure what your point is, except to argue. Mine is, as previously stated,</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>@fenwaypark I have no argument with your point above; but I do, for the reasons I already gave, disagree with your belief that
</p>
<p>I think someone who wants a core like Columbia’s could not replicate it (since Brown doesn’t offer that mandatory first year class) but could easily build a list of classes that covers a wide range of disciplines and thus scratching that itch, so to speak. But for the life of me I cannot understand how someone who wants Brown’s open curriculum could find happiness with Columbia’s core. </p>
<p>i have always thought that Brown’s educational philosophy is diametrically opposed to Columbia’s and UChicago’s, and any student who applies to Brown and a core curriculum school has other priorities for college than the structure of the curriculum. </p>
<p>
I totally agree, and is one of the points that I always bring up to the student who says s/he is applying to all 8 Ivy League schools, SM, etc.</p>