<p>i was just wondering if students at columbia really ENJOY the core. i spoke to a few people who just finished their freshman year, one told me that no one he knows actually likes the core.
what about the SEAS core?
does the core make it extremely hard to double major while taking a few electives?
how hard is it to double major in columbia?
any help would be appreciated!</p>
<p>Don't apply to Columbia if you don't at least like the IDEA of the core.</p>
<p>yeah i like the idea of a core. i really don't mind having required classes. i'm sure i'm going to learn a lot from the core. </p>
<p>but it is college and my family is paying tens of thousands of dollars for my education. i just don't want to go through the core if it really is pointless. honestly i wouldn't really care if money wasn't involved, but college is so expensive and i would like at least enjoy my classes.</p>
<p>the classes are really good and well-thought-out. you will occasionally come out of a class session and actually feel more educated, assuming you have a good teacher.</p>
<p>I didn't find it that onerous but then again i was an engineer, so about 4 standard core classes got substituted for by freshman physics, chemistry, compsci and calculus. C07 can probably tell you more about how his/her schedule worked out, as I imagine skraylor could as well.</p>
<p>LitHum and Contemporary Civilization have been two of my S's favorite courses, and he is not a humanities major. Sure, he hated Frontiers of Science, and he signed up for ArtHum three times until he found an instructor who didn't make him memorize slides. He didn't enjoy every single minute of the core. But overall he found it "great" (his response when I recently asked him this question), it exposed him to a lot of ideas and made him think about things he would not otherwise have thought about. And as a parent paying those thousands of dollars you're talking about, one thing I feel absolutely confident about is my kid is getting an excellent education.</p>
<p>I think it's good that you are asking this question, by the way. The core is a big part of the Columbia experience, and it does not appeal to everyone. I think double majoring is difficult, but my S is managing a joint major plus a concentration, and still has room for some electives. He's in CC, so has taken the full core.</p>
<p>I like the Core. As a whole, it’s pretty good. Obviously there are some sticking points for people—some don’t like CC, some don’t like the language requirement, and Frontiers is pretty universally disliked, but even the classes you don’t like are useful. For me, CC wasn’t a fun class to be taking, but it was a good class to have taken (in terms of exposure to ideas you’ll come across in other classes and Trivial Pursuit-type general knowledge). And don’t underestimate the bonding that comes from complaining about a crappy Core class. Some of it is also genuinely enjoyable. I really liked Lit Hum, and I had a really good professor for one of my science requirement classes.</p>
<p>People tend to complain about the Core as they're going through it, just as they complain about the workloads in courses they've chosen for themselves. In hindsight, though, everyone points to the Core as an enormously positive experience. It will open your eyes to things you wouldn't learn by yourself, you'll meet people who would otherwise keep to other disciplines, and it may even give you the advantage of a few easy As (which, from what I hear, is especially key for SEAS students). The information is not irrelevant - being able to discuss and understand references to some of the greatest literature, art, philosophy, and music of all time has served me well over the course of college.</p>
<p>I asked my freshman daughter, and she says she does not always love the Core, but she always appreciates it (except Frontiers of Science). The only complaint I have heard from her is that work loads and grades vary kind of widely from teacher to teacher, so that you may have to work 3 times as hard to get a B+ in the same course from one teacher as a friend works to get an A from another. She absolutely agrees that good or bad, the Core is a bonding experience. Bottom line is that after a year of it, there is not another school that could entice her to leave Columbia.</p>
<p>What's so bad about FoS?</p>
<p>It doesn't seem pointless at ALL to me. In fact, the core is one of the main reasons I want to apply to Columbia. It seems like an absolutely amazing curriculum.</p>
<p>yeah, frontiers of science was introduced only a few years ago and has been something of a disaster. The same may or may not be true of University Writing (formerly Logic and Rhetoric), which has shifted its focus from short convincing-argument essay writing to a fewer number of pieces more focused on responding to complex readings, plus a research project.</p>
<p>the only easy A I got in any core class was Music Hum, and that was because i'd played classical piano since age 5 and practically knew more than my instructor. everything else i had to work for, just like everyone in the class.</p>
<p>are the core classes that difficult? how hard is it to get an A?</p>
<p>from what i hear, frontiers of science (FoS) is horrible because its not there to actually teach you anything, merely to give you an overview of "science" today. apparently their lectures span everything from astronomy to genetics to chemistry and nothing is really comprehensive.</p>
<p>i sat in on a few lectures this year (being a seas kid i didnt have to take it) because i wanted to see what all the CC kids complained about and, personally, i liked the lectures but i can see why kids would hate it due to the very tedious problem sets and discussion groups they can get...</p>
<p>
[quote]
are the core classes that difficult? how hard is it to get an A?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>some are, some aren't. depends on your prof really. for example, there was 1 prof this year for Lit.Hum. that decided it would be a good idea to give her students the answers for 1/3 of the final (she got caught and fired, dunno what happened to the students)</p>
<p>usually nothing THAT extreme happens but that kind of shows you what i mean..</p>
<p>I actually didn't mind the fact that FoS was an overview of science today. I thought that was a more interesting approach to a science core course than like a CC of science--studying major scientific works through the ages or whatever. I think there are a few reasons FoS is so often complained about. First, some of the units are pretty dull; there are good ones like "what killed the dinosaurs" or "climate change" or "how the brain works and developing language," but for every good unit, there are other ones like "geological history of the earth," which consist of dozens upon dozens of slides of dust samples--no joke. Second, it's probably a bit of the same angst a SEAS person might feel in a Lit Hum class, except there are more humanities people taking Frontiers, so it seems louder. Third, people often complain that the science people are bored in Frontiers, and some of the humanities people think it's hard (and boring). Because science builds on itself moreso than literature, for example, it is harder to accomodate those with strong backgrounds in science, and those with weaker ones. Finally, I think people just like to complain, and Frontiers might just be the least favorite class.</p>
<p>Yes people like the core. I goddamned swear by it. ;)</p>
<p>FoS is... hard to see the point of. Some of Columbia's top scientists take turns elcturing on their area of expertise, with an overarching theme of "the scientific method"- not the one you learned in middle school, but a sort of approach to critical thinking (which is what most liberal arts classes come down to as well). I really enjoyed some of the lectures. However it's a bit disjointed and ultimately feels unnecesarry. I think it would be awesome if they just straight lectured from Bill Bryson's A Short History of Nearly Everything, which is a fantastically written primer on the history of modern science.</p>
<p>how about the engineering core? i heard that's pretty intense. although it seems like if you to major in engineering, those classes would be required anyway.</p>
<p>I love the idea of a core personally, and it's one of the main reasons I'm considering columbia. The idea behind the core is great: the core is supposed to expose you to more than just your major; it's supposed to educate you about the world. In short, it's supposed to make you more cultured.</p>
<p>Even though I'm probably going to be applying to the school of engineering, I like the idea of being exposed to the core, as it creates a well-rounded education.</p>
<p>
[quote]
how about the engineering core? i heard that's pretty intense. although it seems like if you to major in engineering, those classes would be required anyway.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>no, the engineering core is laughable. u.writing, principles of econ, either art or music hum, and choose 1 of lit.hum/CC/or 2 major cultures classes.</p>
<p>throw in the requirement for being enrolled in a math class for your first 4 semesters, 1 sem of chem and physics, and <em>shudder</em> gateway.</p>
<p>haha alright thanks</p>
<p>...and compsci.</p>