<p>One thing that I've regularly seen from Swarthmore (and Reed as well) is that they do very well in getting people into PhD programs and medical school. However, I also know that Swarthmore and Reed are known for tough grading, and seeing how medical schools in particular seem to reward academic cowardice (ie, would rather see a state school 4.0 than swarthmore 3.0), how can Swarthmore do that?</p>
<p>What I'm sure that college admissions people would tell me is that med schools (which I'm interested in going into) are aware of the difficulty of Swarthmore and judge applications accordingly. To what extent is that true?</p>
<p>very. also, note that while english at swat may be much more difficult than english at big state university, it is unlikely that organic chemistry at swat is much more difficult than organic chemistry at big state university, or that you would get much higher grades by going there instead of to swat. lots of swatties end up going to fantastic med school... if thats what you want to do, swat is a great place for it.</p>
<p>Isn't organic chem one of the hardest classes at Swat? I've heard of students taking it at Penn instead of Swat to get a better grade but also fill requirements.</p>
<p>Did you 'hear' that from the article in the pheonix? A few people EVER have taken it at penn... because they think its easier, not because it IS easier. Sometimes people take premed requirements over the summer so they don't have to 'waste' swat credits on classes the expect not to enjoy - like calc, or physics. and I think orgo is one of the harder classes are most universities, no just at swat, and that the difference between orgo at swat and at any comparable (or even not) university is minimal.</p>
<p>The article in the Phoenix that said that "lots" of pre-med students took organic chemistry at other schools because organic chem was so hard at Swat was retracted by the editors of the paper because there was not enough evidence that it was really true. I'm sure that at least a few people have done it, but don't know how common it really is. I suspect it is not nearly as big a deal as was made in the article. Anyway, organic chemistry is supposed to be one of the hardest courses in the pre-med sequence at any college.</p>
<p>Well, Swat students regularly apply to, and attend medical school. Several are going to very good ones. Medical schools, law schools, graduate schools, and most employers know about swat, and that it is challenging. That said, the rumors of Swat's grade deflation have been grossly exaggerated. The median as about the same as that of comparable schools.
In addition, there are amazing opportuntities for biology and biochem students to do substantial research and get published while at swarthmore - which is very helpful when applying to med school.</p>
<p>If I recall, the Phoenix retracted that entire article the following week.</p>
<p>Taking Orgo in summer school is fairly common at many universities. I know that some Harvard premeds do so. Basically, the plan is to spend the summer taking ONE course and trying to get a decent grade.</p>
<p>I'm guessing that there is probably less of that at Swat, just because transfering credits isn't that easy.</p>
<p>I don't have that many data points in the science departments, but my young'un says that, if you go to class, do the work, and turn in the assignments, you are probably going to get at least a "B" from most professors. Getting "A"s is less predictable. That depends on the professor's individual grading style, how you "click" with the themes of the course, how interesting you find the material, etc. My Swattie's theory is that most people who get into academic trouble at Swat are probably in trouble because they not doing the basic work, either a result of an overabitious social schedule or taking on too heavy a load of courses and ECs.</p>
<p>Wow, thanks everyone. This has been really helpful. Do most agree that rumors about Swarthmore's difficulty have been exaggerated.</p>
<p>(In college, I'm willing to put in some Saturday night study sessions if everyone else has to do so as well. I just don't want to be studying the entire time.)</p>
<p>"Do most agree that rumors about Swarthmore's difficulty have been exaggerated."</p>
<p>I do. There is a lot of work to be done, but it certainly is manageable if you have your priorities straight... And no, people don't work all the time.</p>
<p>I find that it is like people our inducted into the cult of Swarthmore difficulty. Sure, it can be hard. But it doesn't kill people. So yes, I do think Swarthmore's <em>difficulty</em> has been exaggerated. However, I think there is a big difference between difficulty and intensity.</p>
<p>As a recent grad ('03), I'd say that rumors of grade deflation at Swarthmore are exaggerated, but that the college's difficulty and intensity are not exaggerated. Although it is not necessarily <i>harder</i> to get an A than at comparable schools (or at least not as much harder as the admissions office would have you think), you are expected to <i>work harder</i> to get it.</p>
<p>Another question I have is whether testing is similar at the college level everywhere--ie a midterm, paper or two, and a final--for most classes. Is it? </p>
<p>Do liberal arts schools ever have classes that do not have tests but are instead solely discussion and essay based? this is another thing I'm curious about.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do liberal arts schools ever have classes that do not have tests but are instead solely discussion and essay based? this is another thing I'm curious about.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>From what my daughter tells me, about half of her classes have had no exams -- mid-term and final papers, only. Sometimes what is called an "exam" is really a take-home essay assignment.</p>
<p>Depends on the course. Math, stat, art history, sciences will be more likely to have exams.</p>
<p>I have been wondering about this grade inflation/deflation "thing." When I went to college in the early 1970's A's were hard to get. I would have to look back at my college transcript to check this, but as I remember my own performance, I was cum laude (in the top 25%) with a GPA of 3.2??? Maybe it was a 3.4. I really don't remember. Could this be correct? I had a mix of A's and B's, with a few C's and -- gasp-- an F in a course I tried to drop but they "denied' me the right to drop. Controls were tighter then. Yes, it was the early 70's and I didn't bother attending class if the class "bored" me. There weren't many of those, though. I got a (or is that "an"?) honors degree in history. Lots of hard work. Reading, research, writing. I remember working exceedingly hard in some classes, just to get a B. No one got an A in some of my classes. So, is grade deflation just a return to what I experienced? By the way, I had no trouble going on to graduate school. </p>
<p>What do you all think about this? Did something happen between 1975 and now that created a situation in which everyone thinks they should make an A? Also, I remember school as being an intensely intellectual experience. This was a good thing, I thought. My time in college was exciting most of the time. Even parties were often intellectual experiences. I loved all that. Expansion of the mind....</p>