<p>What is this test like? What exactly does it test? How hard is it to get into MATH-16100?
Can I find a copy of a past test online?</p>
<p>It's really not terrible, but maybe my version of what's easy and hard in math is skewed. There will be a section of "pre-calc" trigonometry, geometry, etc, and then a section of integration/derivation, and then a section of definitions and theoretical stuff.</p>
<p>The first two sections are no harder than anything that's on the AP AB/BC exam, if that comparison helps. There's also a non-calc version of the placement test available for students who haven't yet taken calc.</p>
<p>I remember answering a lot of questions in the first section, the trig section, and the third section, which asks for definition of a limit and such, and skipping over most of the integrations. I was more comfortable with the delta-epsilon proofs than I ever was with integration. I was placed into 15300/16100.</p>
<p>Math 161 is extremely proof-based and extremely theoretical, and a lot of students end up taking 150's instead. However, a lot of students also try 160's to see what it's like, and then drop down-- but a long story short, if you're looking to try it out, it's not super hard to get in.</p>
<p>How long is it?</p>
<p>Thanks very much. I find it quite surprising that you were placed into 15300/16100. That means you were good enough to skip two out of three quarters in the 15- sequence but still had to start from the beginning for the 16- sequence.</p>
<p>Also, do students drop down to the 15- sequence from the 16- sequence because the 16- sequence is extremely difficult or simply because they realize they are not interested in studying math at such a theoretical level?</p>
<p>1) The 160's sequence is like learning math all over again, through proofs, so everybody starts at the beginning. Even if you've taken courses beyond calc, if you're interested in pursuing the honors level, you're most likely going to be starting with 161.</p>
<p>2) Both reasons. The 160's sequence is quite difficult, and students realize that that's not the direction that they want to take their studies in. You'll have the opportunity to make that decision for yourself-- there's no harm in trying 160's if you think you would like it.</p>
<p>oh, i have a question about this. as a transfer student who is probably going to be a human development major (and if not that, it still wouldn't be math or hard science related), what level do i need to test at so that i don't have to take any more math?</p>
<p>also, is it possible that they'd allow my statistics class to transfer? i know as a general rule they don't take math, because of the placement test, but stats seems kind of separate from the calculus track.</p>
<p>If you're doing pretty well in BC Calc, you will likely get the 153/161 placement. The 160s sequence starts at the beginning with 161 for all students who place into it (with a few strange exceptions). A 5 on BC places you out of 151 and 152. If you at least make an effort with harder problems, you'll probably get the 161 option. </p>
<p>People tend to drop down because they don't want to spend so much time on math or decided that they did not want to pursue a math major. There are non math majors in the 160s, but they all love math.</p>
<p>The placement test is as long as you make it: the questions get progressively harder, so you can stop whenever you stop knowing the answers.</p>
<p>Ruyi, call Admissions and ask about your stats class. You can place out of math with stats, but I have no idea whether your class would transfer. The math requirement is one math quarter; however, if the math requirement is to be met with calculus, two quarters must be taken.</p>
<p>I am interested in an Applied Mathematics major, and so the theoretical nature of 16100 and friends is not especially appealing. Is it possible to place out of 15300 and into 19900? What is covered in 15300 that isn't in a normal Calc BC class?</p>
<p>Most are placed into 153. Your friends at other colleges may be placed into multivariable having done BC in high school, but 153 is challenging as it is. I haven't taken the class, so I don't know for sure, but it's going to be more in depth than the BC Calc curriculum, and it will include delta-epsilon proofs... and friends :-)</p>
<p>All higher level math at the University of Chicago (and I'm assuming this is true to some degree anywhere) is theoretical in nature.</p>
<p>I'm aware, but there's clearly a difference in magnitude between honors and normal level.</p>
<p>If you want to be a math major, you should take the highest level of math for which you qualify. You are going to be required, even as Applied Math, to take a number of theory-based classes. If you take a lower level math, you will need to take 199 to prepare yourself for proof-based math. If you are recommended into 160s and are looking at a math major, you should absolutely take it.</p>
<p>What are the benefits of taking the 160s over 199?</p>
<p>Corranged,
Does one take 199 before the 160s sequence? What if one has done some work in proofs already? DS is a junior looking at a math major and is taking an accelerated MV/DiffEq class this year. He sat in on 16200 and 20800 in January when he visited.</p>
<hr>
<p>Edit -- Where is the course listing for 19900? I didn't see it in the online course description (which may be why we'd never heard of it...).</p>
<p>199 is a course students who have finished the 130s/150s take before starting analysis. Students who have taken the 160s can go directly to analysis without taking 199. It's a new course, I believe, so all of the online listings may not be current (timeschedules.uchicago.edu is what current students use to see when classes are). </p>
<p>The benefit of 160s for math majors who can take it is that it is much more rigorous than the lower calc sequences, and it will best prepare you for higher math study. Further, 153 in the autumn is filled with students who are trying to fulfill a requirement by finishing the calc sequence but do not desire to major in math. In the 160s you will be with like-minded people. It will also challenge you to determine whether a math major is what you actually want to do. If you decide that you don't actually like college math (which is significantly different than most high school math), you can drop down to 153, which many students do. </p>
<p>CountingDown, it's hard to tell where your son would be placed. If he's well-versed in proofs and does well on the placement, he may have the opportunity to take Honors Analysis. There are some first years who start off with 195, 199, or 201, but the general placements are 131, 151, 152, 153, and 161, with some students placed into Honors Analysis.</p>
<p>Do most students from the 160s proceed to analysis or honors analysis?</p>
<p>Countdown, I think I'm in the same position as your son, and I might have some recommendations for him. This year, as a senior, I have taken university classes in Multivar, Diff Eq, Discrete Math, Linear Algebra, Number Theory, and Probability Theory and aced all of them, so I thought that the 16- sequence should be a breeze.</p>
<p>After talking with UChicago students, I was told that this was not necessarily so. As I'm quite the skeptic, however, I decided to ignore them, but I finally took things into my own hands and looked at the 16- sequence course notes and homework and found them to be quite the challenge. So I bought 'Calculus', by Michael Spivak (the book UChicago uses for the 16- sequence) online so I could see just how advanced I was in terms of UChicago math.</p>
<p>Well, let me tell you. There's no joke about this course and the distance between 15- sequence and 16- sequence is huge. In the very first homework assignment, you have to prove the binomial theorem, which, although I learned how to do in discrete math, most people who have taken the regular math course sequences probably wouldn't know how to do. I have friends headed to Princeton as math majors that have no idea how to do this despite having taken up through Honors Real Analysis at a university.</p>
<p>Even today's most advanced calculus courses in high schools (and in 90% of colleges) don't compare to the stuff that Spivak does. Spivak's book gives off the feeling that if you think that an integral is just defined to be the area of a curve between two points, you're a flat-out idiot. Even the Riemann sum definition doesn't seem to be enough. (A function f which is bounded on [a,b] is integrable on [a,b] if sup{L(f,P) : P a partition of [a,b]} = inf{U(f,P):P a partition of [a,b]}. In this case, the common number is called the integral of f on [a,b]. This is Spivak's definition.)</p>
<p>As a future math major who gets particularly peeved at the non-theoretical nature of today's math courses, I must say that the best thing you can do for your son at this moment is get him this book and tell him to study it. In my Calculus courses, I was never taught what an infimum or a supremum was (despite the fact that it's such a simple and useful concept), and because of that, I had to completely rethink everything I had previously learned in integral calculus. The intent of the 16- sequence is to create a solid foundation in mathematics that the 15- sequence just doesn't provide. The 199 class mentioned probably also wouldn't be suitable for him if he is really as serious as he sounds.</p>
<p>Your son should definitely either start in the 16- sequence or in Honors Analysis. I highly suggest you get him Spivak, though. He'll have a higher chance of testing into Honors Analysis if he is able to grasp the content of this book. And even if he doesn't grasp the content of the book, he'll have a good idea of what he's getting into. (And it won't be a waste of money, either, if you consider the fact that if he doesn't test out, he can use the book later for the course, and if he does test out, he'll be saving himself a year's worth of math.) Win-win situation.</p>
<p>Phuriku,
Are you headed to Chicago next year? DS just read your post over my shoulder and was licking his chops over your description. His math teacher uses Swokowski's Calculus with Analytic Geometry, 3rd Edition (1984) and Edwards and Penney, Differential Equations with Applications, 2nd Ed. (1989). His teacher is pretty old-school on rigor and so likes the older editions because they retain the theory that subsequent editions have dropped. DS's copy of Swokowski is hanging together by a thread.</p>
<p>DS agrees that we should get the Spivak book. He never asks for much -- keep him supplied in textbooks and funny t-shirts, and he is quite the happy camper. I think he is going to try to find more info on 199, too. A good family friend of ours (who was a math/CS major long ago) asked me what DS was planning to major in, and when I told him math/CS and why -- that he loves theory and proofs -- he said, "then it's the right thing for him to major in math."</p>
<p>CountingDown, I'm currently in the same position as your son as a junior and I've talked to some of the people at the math department at the University of Chicago. Phuriku's advice is gold in my opinion, as simple as it is. From the information that I've received, if your son does pretty well on the placement test he can skip the 160s series or move straight into the Analysis sequence which was labeled as Math 19900-20300-20400-20500. They have a consultation meeting with you after you go to the school to decide where you should being your math sequence.</p>
<p>From looking at these posts, the three courses in the Honors Calc sequence seem really useful especially if your son's even a little shaky or unsure of proofs. Good luck to your son and maybe we'll see each other in about a year and a half. :)</p>