Hello. I’m considering THEA 100 as one of the options for fulfilling the HAP requirement but I wasn’t sure if it’s right for me. What is it like and what does the majority of class time consist of? I’m quite an introverted person who would avoid public attention as much as possible. It’s a bad idea, right? I was just giving it a hint of a thought since I heard it’s very easy as long as I don’t miss any classes. I don’t have issues giving presentations, but I thought that acting would be a different matter.
@Astantine : Can’t believe I am up. Anyway, is the rest of your planned schedule really rough enough to worry about the ease of this particular class/requirement. If not, can’t you just choose something else that you may enjoy that doesn’t concern you with the issue of introversion. There are many options. Also, the purpose of some courses is to get you out of your comfort zone and get you to work on issues like that. From what I hear, usually introverted folks end up fine in that class. Instructors for these courses are usually very patient and understanding. It is a 100 level course kind of meant to get people comfortable with it.
Unless there is a valid reason, find a criteria other than ease to choose a GER of any type, especially in the case that it will bring other types of discomfort that you may not want to face. There are plenty of relatively easy courses to find with that designation.
I see. Yeah I was looking for an easy course since I’ll be taking organic chemistry, physics for scientists and engineers, diff. eq, and a language course which takes up 17 credits before THEA 100. Thank you for your advice and always being helpful.
@Astantine : Many courses, go find an easy one you like. Also, the real question is: Are you getting rigorous instruction in ochem, calc. based physics (traditionally has easy instructors who water down course), and diff. eq.(math courses at Emory below the upper division courses…all over the place)? Instructors matter more so than course title as you know by now. Depending on who you have for those, you could afford a less generous GER. I, for example, do not believe in the whole : “Organic chemistry is hard no matter what”. Some teachers turn it into a joke. Diff. Eq., some teachers turn it into a cookbook, plug and chug course/just repeat the HW problems on exam course. Physics, some instructors may avoid putting calculus on exams. I have seen the latter, it is very real. You may not need to be so picky for the 5th course. I would be say…only if I was taking Weinschenk for ochem. That will likely require time and deep thought and prep.
Bing is teaching Physics 151 (calculus-based) in the fall for the first time in a long time. Wouldn’t that imply that it will be more rigorous, given his reputation?
I don’t understand why anyone needs to take more than 17 credit hours in a semester.
@BiffBrown : Credit hours are meaningless as a measure at Emory, because some classes are counting as 5 or 4 hours when they shouldn’t. Like at other schools on the 3 hour unit system, language courses, CWR (assuming school has said requirement) or not, would likely be 3 hours or maybe 4 if it met 4-5 days a week. At Emory main, they just tack on hours to courses with a CWR designation, labs, and recitations (which they call labs at Emory) like it is nothing. For example, ochem lab now has 2 credits. At other schools it would not. They found a loophole to get it 2 credits by simply adding 30 minutes to the lab. In normal cases, a lab must meet twice to get 6 hours, but now chem 150-L, and biology 141/142-L have the designation. Even if the credits were based upon workload, only bio lab would deserve it. If one took 2 languages or CWRs and 2 lab sciences at Emory, I would be at minimum 18 credit ours (the CWRs would be at least 4 a piece and the lecture and lab are now, starting, fall 2017, mostly 5 a piece)
I guess Bing is teaching, but sometimes they list him because they don’t know who it is, and then they exchange the name at the last minute. If he does teach, he “may” be more rigorous, and hopefully he is because the course is for pre-engineering folks and majors. Typically those teaching it are way too soft and many students suffer in upper division physics courses. Although, I must say he hasn’t really been that rigorous when teaching 141/142 for a while, but I think it is because of the size of the section (141/142 used to be several sections like the other intros. and then when trying a new model suggested by former Dean Foreman, went to 2 very large sections taught by one person like other institutions) . 151 is smaller, so he may have more time to teach and test rigorously, and regardless he is one of the most, if not the most effective instructor in that dept. He could likely attract physics majors unlike others.
In addition, it is questionable if he was very rigorous before. He was one of the instructors in the country who migrated to testing conceptual knowledge more than normal, and non-physics/chemistry students often do not like that in chemistry or physics classes. They will consider it hard if they cannot kind of just jump through some mathematical hoops or plug and chug. It was certainly harder than less selective publics and privates, but that shouldn’t be what physics at Emory gets compared to. The fact is, most top privates in Emory’s league do not offer trig. based physics courses for STEM majors. All STEM depts. require their majors to take a calculus based physics class (and usually these schools offer multiple tiers of calculus based physics…so yes pre-healths may take an easier or life sciences version, but they nonetheless take calc. based).
The same is usually true at top publics. This means that pre-meds at other similar caliber schools, who are mostly STEM (bio and life sciences) majors take some sort of calculus based physics. I have always wondered if that the commonality of that “softness” showing up in transcripts from Emory puts it at a sort of disadvantage versus applicants of other elites. My guess is that they would expect a greater share of students going to a school in the same tier as other elite privates to take the same level of courses. Of course medical schools obviously take lots of folks with the 141/2 credits but I would have to wonder if the gap would close between it and the others (especially with like top 30 medical schools) if Emory presented them with normal “attended elite private” applicants. This is just one instance that differentiates many Emory applicants in a bad way (I believe there is also too much “maneuvering” to avoid taking STEM classes together that ends up being very obvious in transcripts. Like too many people taking several cores during summers, and not away from campus which means they cannot play it off as: “I was trying to save money”). And before the 3 hour system, many Emory students were alternating between 3 and 4 courses a semester (with the 3 becoming common in later years and some people starting 3 as early as like sophomore year), which made them look lazy as most even elite schools had students alternated more like between 4 and 5 (5 was less common among STEM majors at Emory). With the new system, it becomes harder to take semesters with 3 courses unless loaded with STEM courses and even then, unless a senior, you should throw in a random 4th course, even it is just some bird course.
To graduate, one need only average 16 credit hours per semester. That’s why I don’t understand the need to take more than 17 crediit hours.
Right now, orgo lab + lecture = 5 credit hours. That seems fair given how much time the class takes as a whole.
What’s unusual is that the lab is graded separately from lecture and receives as much 2 credit hours - almost equal to the weight given the lecture.
@BiffBrown : Lab is not that rigorous. For example, no posters, presentations, or lab reports are required (bio 141/142-L on main used to have all of these so an argument could have been made about that workload. Now 2/3 of those components remain, still more than most intro. labs). Based upon contact hours, it should really not have 2 hours. 2 hour courses usually meet twice and have more rigorous workloads that encompass more than doing p-sets and filling out pre and post-lab worksheets. Versus an easier lecturer, maybe the lab is technically more rigorous and would deserve comparable credits, but versus other labs I know of, including those that still receive 1 credit (such as physics 151/152-L or even physics 141/142-L which is only about as rigorous as gchem lab and is still worth an integrated 1 hour), it just doesn’t compare. It is like a slightly more intense version of gchem lab. Gchem lab also does not deserve 2 hours and is getting it on main. I compare the Emory course to other schools (mainly peer schools) on the Carnegie System and how much they would make the lab worth. Labs that receive more than 1 unit usually meet twice or once for 5-6 hours and typically have lab reports/more rigorous workloads (on top of all this, the labs may even have mid-terms as opposed to the notebook and theory and practice final for ochem lab and just the lab notebook check for gchem lab). The workload is just not comparable, and even some of those schools still only assign a single unit for the lab. The 2 credit hours for ochem came about partially through student surveying. I am not surprised of the result as even the easy instructors (who typically get weaker cohorts than tougher counterparts overall) have relatively low grade distributions compared to lab. Two credit hours for lab provides a potential buffer.
Also, again, just because it is ochem, does not mean it is a lot of work. It strongly depends on instructor like other STEM courses. An easier ochem instructor may require less effort than medium level gchem instructors on main.
Differences in hours taken sometimes occur by happenstance. In addition, in the case someone has a major that has high credit hour requirements (especially those requiring tons of electives), students are more likely to take higher than 16 hours. It really is not that hard to exceed it given how the hours are allocated now. On the old system, you would be at 16 hours by taking 4 courses. For many STEM majors, this is still true. Through in a couple of 2 hour labs, and an intro. language course, and boom you are over that number of hours. For students who are not STEM or English majors, things get a bit more challenging and 16 hours may correspond to 5 courses, so 17 would actually be a decent amount.
Throw* and I meant 17 would be a lot in case of non-STEM non-English majors.