<p>A top student from D1’s high school said he wished there were fewer AP courses because he felt pressure in having to take them for college application purpose. He wished he could have taken more electives - photography, art, music. I think there is something to be said for that. A lot of students looking to apply to top tier colleges feel compelled to take the “most rigorous” courses, but find very little time for electives.</p>
<p>Our hs has lots of space built in for electives, and our oft-maligned block schedule actually helped with that. My kids got to take some cool stuff.</p>
<p>My dd did the IB and took AP classes. She got her IB diploma and passed the AP tests. She found IB classes harder than AP. She didn’t have the drama so many kids say they have with staying up all night. She had a couple of late nights but not many. She played 3 varsity sports and had the EE and a science fair project due close together and dragged her feet on them. She volunteered every Sunday and many other hours through the years. Her high school had a very low pass rate for the diploma. Like a 33% pass rate. It is an open admissions type of high school. They decided to put these programs in poor performing high schools so that is part of the problem. I guarantee you if we put this program in one of our better school districts the shool would be at the very top of the nation and more kids would take the program and do very well. </p>
<p>The top 25 students in the high school were all IB students. Many of the IB students got AP scholar awards too so there is no reason to believe you can not do both. You maybe shut out of some AP options but not all them because the IB program is so rigid. </p>
<p>I did find LACs were more stingy with awarding credit for IB than universties but I can not say that is universial because of my very limited experience. </p>
<p>Neither AP or IB is a good program for brillant kids. Brilliant kids need to find a better place to learn. I don’t think our schools really have anything that would keep a genius interested. These programs would bore the tears out of the brilliant. They are good for the top 20%-25% of kids that are national tested. Not top 20% to 25% of your your own school district because we all know there are some districts that barely have any kids that would do well and others most kids would do well. When you start allowing everyone to take IB/AP it softens the course and your pass rate goes down. With the right select group your pass rate is very high.</p>
<p>Around here the elite private schools that send disproportionate numbers of kids to top colleges place limits to keep kids’ schedules in balance. Kids generally take 5 regular classes (science, social studies, math, English, foreign language), a sport every season, and an art every semester. Some schools don’t have AP, other have it but limit kids in number or in which grade they can start.</p>
<p>Clearly, if the goal is college admissions, this plan works because they get kids in. The kids benefit because they have time for great extracurriculars and yet get the “most rigorous” notation because the rules prevent crazy schedules.</p>
<p>“I’m pretty sure that no more than 4 subjects can be HL.” - True. At our hs, most students take 3 HL. The 4th HL is discourage and complicates scheduling, but some students (including DS) do it. </p>
<p>The IB scores depend on more than just the exam. Students may think that is a good thing or a bad thing.</p>
<p>I think it’s pretty unfortunate that colleges essentially encourage high schools to limit the amount of APs/advanced classes students can take. While this may reduce stress for many students it will undoubtedly leave the best very bored as momof3greatgirls alluded to. While it may increase college admissions results overall at some schools, it probably hurts the very best students who would otherwise be clearly able to distinguish themselves from the rest of the school.</p>
<p>UMT . . . </p>
<p>I’m not sure I agree with you. If schools are limiting APs by telling kids they need to take an onlevel class instead, yes that can lead to boredom. On the other hand, if a school is limiting kids to 5 classes overall, and giving kids time to explore the arts, get really good in a sport, and develop outside skills such as participating in science research, mastering a musical instrument, getting intensively involved in drama, doing meaningful community service . . . Plus, teachers who are teaching in a school with fewer periods see less kids and can assign things like longer papers. I see that as more appropriate for the most gifted kids than more classes. </p>
<p>I was a pretty gifted high school student. After 9th grade, I moved from an private school where I took 5 classes plus an art and a sport, to a public high school where I took 8 or 9 academic classes a year. All 8 or 9 of those, including those at the AP level (this was in Canada so they didn’t have the AP label) were boring, plus I had enough busy work homework (note: homework that might have been meaningful for a student who needed the review, I didn’t) that I had less time to do the things that were interesting and meaningful and challenging to me. I felt like if the classes were there I had to take them, but frankly I didn’t need the equivalent of AP Calc AND AP stats and AP Bio, Chem and Physics etc . . . Furthermore, in the public school setting, where classes were shorter and there was a lot of cramming knowledge, I didn’t have the opportunity to write longer papers, or choose a topic and go into depth. I did more research in my 9th grade classes (not AP) at private than I did in the rest of high school. When I got to college I had more experience reading and writing than any of my US public school educated peers, mostly based on that 9th grade year, making me think that their experiences were the same.</p>
<p>So, no I don’t think that gifted kids need to take a million APs or they’ll be bored. If anything, I think that making them take a million APs in order to gain access to institutions where they will be challenged is going to guarantee they’ll be bored.</p>
<p>Perhaps I was unclear but I wasn’t really arguing that the problem was too few classes in a day. I think the real problem is when students are forced to take an honors class below AP level instead of an actual AP class or told you can only take X number of APs when it their schedules could accommodate more. Excessive busywork is also an issue. I think there’s a benefit to being able to do lots of extracurriculars but I think the time could also be well spent on more advanced classes. In particular, if possible I think advanced math and science classes at good universities are a better use of time than high school science research.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure this isn’t relevant to the few posts preceding me but for those of you who are concerned about IB vs AP scores, here is my own two cents.</p>
<p>For the starters, IB HL is harder than AP in the corresponding subject. Two years of subject is always much more complete than any one year.</p>
<p>There are many who say IB SL (Standard Level) is much easier than AP. This is both true and not true. Last year I, and a few friends, took the IB Biology SL test AND the AP Biology test. I was enrolled in a IB Biology course.
For the test experience, the IB Biology SL test, is much more relaxed. The whole exam is split between two days (an easy MC and part 1 of short answer 1st day, and 1 hour of part 2 short answer 2nd day). The test was remarkably easy (partially because I took the IB Biology course and not the AP course). For my AP test, it was grueling. I guessed on a number of MC questions while writing as much as I can for my short answers. By the end of the day, I was so worn out.
BUT THIS DOES NOT MEAN IT IS EASIER TO GET THE SCORE THAN IN AP. </p>
<p>For AP, I only did 1 day of extra studying on top of my IB studying.
Here’s the results: I got a 6 (out of 7) in my IB Biology SL test and 5 (of 5) in my AP test. 3 other friends who also took both got 5 (of 7) in their Biology SL test and 5 (of 5) in their AP test. Another friend got a 4 in their Bio SL and 3 on the AP Bio. </p>
<p>What is my conclusion?
The Biology SL test puts you in an easier environment. I think it is a false truth that AP is harder. In terms of depth it is, it covers things more deeply. However IB has greater breadth. Another factor in the IB tests is its reasoning. AP tests ask for you to “what, how, explain” - basically re-call questions from a night’s worth of cramming. However IB tests give a student more room for individual deduction and individual thought. It presents you with premises and you will have to thing of what might happen and support it with details. </p>
<p>Also, although the IB test was somewhat easier, I did not get a full score as I did on the AP test. With past data from my teacher, students in the class who score a 5 (of 7) or greater on the IB test often will score a 5/5 on the AP test. The IB test is easy, but it does not have a curve. The IB scores are basically grade bands. 96%+ =7, 90%+ =6, 80-89% = 5, etc. While AP scores are curved with respect to those who are testing in the same room as you are in. </p>
<p>What is ironic is that schools accept an AP score of 4-5 but WILL NOT EVEN CONSIDER any IB SL scores. They only take IB HL scores of 5-7, which is much more difficult to do (with much much more depth and time spent) than a mere 4-5 on a single-year AP test.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not true, since some low quality schools have students take AP tests with few or none getting scores above 2, while some better schools have students who mostly get 5 scores on some AP tests.</p>