does anyone actually like the Core?

<p>The core is part of the reason I want to go to Columbia.</p>

<p>From what I can tell from the catalog, there is no specific exemption for Frontiers of Science for CC students majoring in the sciences.</p>

<p>The following is a selection from the College bulletin:</p>

<p>Prospective science majors who in their first-year are enrolled in
Literature Humanities,
A mathematics course,
A language course at the elementary II level or above ,
And one of the following science major sequence,
CHEM C3045 - C3046
PHYS C1601 - C1602
PHYS C2801 - C2802</p>

<p>may petition the Committee on Science Instruction to be allowed to postpone taking Frontiers of Science until their sophomore year. Students wishing to petition should do so in 208 Hamilton Hall.</p>

<p>From what I can tell and heard from other students, all CC students, science majors or not, have to take Frontiers, but they may be able to delay it past their freshman year.</p>

<p>If I am wrong maybe a current student can correct me.</p>

<p>I thought everyone, including science majors, had to take Frontiers? You have to take it freshman year in CC before majors are declared, so I'm not sure how it'd be possible to exempt just the science "majors". Edit: Seems like WiseOWL got to it before I did.</p>

<p>Anyway, complaining about Frontiers gets kind of old. The problem sets weren't that bad. A common complaint was that questions were badly worded; it was easy to over-complicate things. But they have a Frontiers help room where you can get help on the homework. From what I heard, in past years, the help room people more or less gave out the answers, but they changed things around this year.</p>

<p>Another common complaint is that the seminars are unnecessary. Most of the time, you review stuff or do activities that illustrate concepts from lecture. The seminars are also ~2 hours long, so they get old fast. </p>

<p>Some of the lectures are pretty interesting, though.</p>

<p>i like the Core that's like one of my reason to go. actually it's SEAS Core i really want to go and luv the Core thing cuz it allows me to do art along w/ math and science. i dont think other top school does not sure</p>

<p>UChicago. There's a thread somewhere about which schools still have a core curriculum.</p>

<p>Frontiers is possibly a good idea in theory, but as a class it is a complete waste of time, if you are already a science person. This semester, it seems to have turned into group projects, which everyone figured they'd be done with by the time they got to college. Also, in a ******** manner of grading, you can lose points for creativity on some things in this class.</p>

<p>Lit Hum is rather interesting, though, and University Writing was dead useful. The Core in general is pretty excellent, as far as I can tell, but Frontiers of Science is really lame.</p>

<p>
[quote]
This semester, it seems to have turned into group projects, which everyone figured they'd be done with by the time they got to college.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This makes me laugh. Most colleges nowadays are really big into group projects because they are used so frequently in the real world, especially in scientific fields, but even in consulting, banking, etc.</p>

<p>I have not paid much attention to CC's core, but I'm absolutely in love with the SEAS core. I've always been struggling about entering a liberal arts school or a solely-based engineering school. At Columbia SEAS, I'd be able to major in what I like, Computer Engineering and minor in my second greatest interest: East Asian Studies, and at the same time the core requires economics classes, which I've always wanted. Literature requirements was something I looked forward to in liberal arts schools, but SEAS has that required too. I'm definitely in love.</p>

<p>I came across Denzera's post, no 45 just now. Yes, there are great thinkers and writers in other cultures but there is not enough time to study all of them; an individual in our western culture needs to know Greco-Roman inheritance and not Confucius. Naipaul is the only modern novelist worth reading but he is not part of the tradition of the novel. Tyndale's influence on the novel is so extensive that it is not possible to mention here. I mean the writer of the King James Bible.</p>

<p>There was a mention of Gandhi. Biggest influences on him? Tolstoy, the synoptic gospels and Thoreau.</p>