<p>I'm feeling a bit confused about whether it's too risky not to take a fourth year of science.</p>
<p>I've always heard that it's best to take four years of classes in each "academic" subject (math, English, science, social studies and a foreign language) in order to be a competitive applicant to the most competitive schools. However, I've also noticed that most colleges do not have rigid course requirements for admission; instead, most of them list "suggested" or "recommended" courses. And, to make things more iffy, some lists, like Columbia's, say things like "3 to 4 years of science." Does this mean that there's more leniency than counselors let on? Or is the absence of rigid requirements geared more towards students from schools that don't offer all of the courses on the "recommended" list? I don't know exactly what to gather from websites that recommended 4 years of science -- or any other subject, for that matter -- but then go on to say that it's "okay" to take less than 4 classes in science. How much of a difference can that "okay" make come admissions season when compared to a student who took science all 4 years? </p>
<p>Basically, what I'm wondering is this: Is fulfillment of course "recommendations" an essential factor in admissions, if the student had every opportunity to take the recommended courses? How important is it to take the recommended number of years? Can taking less than four years of one of the academic subjects be held against an applicant in the admissions process? Also, what do you guys think of taking less of certain subjects in order to take more of others? Could this be held against an applicant?</p>
<p>I know that's a lot of questions, but I figured that if anyone could help me out, it would be the CC community. I'd appreciate any and all advice about picking courses that you guys could throw at me.</p>
<p>Thanks! :)</p>
<p>journeeverte,</p>
<p>I'd suggest to do four years of science. As much as I absolutely HATE science, I took 5 science classes throughout high school to challenge myself (especially that damn AP Physics course). </p>
<p>The "recommended" classes are basically an unwritten requirement for ivies...unfortunately I found out the hard way with three years of foreign languages.</p>
<p>Thanks for your reply, Leticia! I think I'll go with an AP science class (probably Physics). Thanks again :)</p>
<p>No problem.
I'd recommend Physics B over Physics C...I'm doing C and completely screwed for the E+M section...(C is actually two tests...)</p>
<p>Yeah, I'll probably take Physics B because C is supposed to be so hard (and I'm not very science-inclined myself). Is it because of the math or because of the concepts?</p>
<p>you don't really need a fourth year of science (unless the school requires it, of course)...i fared pretty well this year in the college admissions area, but i only had 3 years of science (long story). that being said, if you can take the "extra" science course without it negatively affecting your other classes/activities/obligations, it can only help you.</p>
<p>I'm taking 5 years of science...I took 9th grade Earth Science in 8th grade, bio in 9th, chem in 10th, physics this year in 11th, and I'm taking AP bio (actually a 2 credit course) next year. Science is good!</p>
<p>If you can make up for it with a real passion and/or strength in other areas, especially in the core subjects, I'd say focus on those. I'm in sort of the opposite boat, so I'm taking lots of science classes (1 in Freshman, 2 in Sophomore, 2 in Junior, 2 in Senior), although I am still making sure to take as many classes in every area as possible.</p>
<p>Eventhough it's a good idea to have 4 years of Science and 4 years of Math. Make sure you don't get C and D in these classes if you are taking them, ie if you are weak in Math, take AP statistics instead. Senior year grades are very important because it will affect your college admission results, unless you're applying early somewhere.</p>