<p>I don't know what's meant by "rigorous curriculum" as far as colleges go. All colleges pretty much say they offer one, but I'm mostly wondering about the top 50 up. Is it hours upon hours of mindless busy work? Coursework that focuses impossibly hard concepts that can't be understood without a great innate intelligence? Is it stretching students to their limits(and not in the bad, stressful way) to make them acheive something greater than they expected? Or is it something else?</p>
<p>What is a "rigorous curriculum" in college?</p>
<p>A rigorous curriculum would be the hardest level classes offered at a particular high school. Usually a rigorous curriculum challenges a student. If work is too easy, then it is not very rigorous for that student. Usually harder classes involve more thinking, more writing, more challenge, higher expectations and more work (but not busy work). For my own children, they were not content to take classes that were too easy and sought out the most challenging courses, thus the most rigorous, offered at their high school, as well as acceleration or independent studies. Colleges will examine what courses a student has chosen in high school and put more stock or value into students who have challenged themselves by taking the more rigorous or harder courses that the particular high school has offered.</p>
<p>For example, I know that one set of my niece and nephew do not take Honors or AP classes and they seem to have very little homework. My kids took much harder classes and often had 3-5 hours of work per night, many papers and projects and so forth to do.</p>
<p>I would also ask the guidance counselor at your high school what would be considered "most rigorous curriculum" for that school, in terms of # of academic credits, # of honors, APs, etc.</p>
<p>It's something most selective colleges will ask the guidance counselor, as in "How would you characterize this student's curriculum: College Prep, Rigorous, More Rigorous than average, Most Rigorous..."</p>
<p>If you are trying for a very selective school, you don't want the guidance counselor checking something like "Average". </p>
<p>My son's school offers over 20 AP classes, so you don't get the "Most Rigorous" designation without taking a pile of them. Some schools only offer 4 or 5, so if you've taken 4 or 5 at that school, and the rest honors, you'll probably get the "Most rigorous" designation.</p>
<p>"Rigorous Curriculum" is going to be based on how difficult your curriculum is relative to that offered at your high school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Is it hours upon hours of mindless busy work? Coursework that focuses impossibly hard concepts that can't be understood without a great innate intelligence? Is it stretching students to their limits(and not in the bad, stressful way) to make them acheive something greater than they expected?
[/quote]
Maybe all of those things. One person's "fascinating" may be another person's "stultifying." I tend to think of "rigorous" as precise and thorough--maybe even a bit harsh and unforgiving in the degree of precision and thoroughness.</p>
<p>I'm not sure which colleges claim they offer a "rigorous curriculum." I don't remember coming across this when research colleges (top 15).</p>
<p>Let's take math. At Harvard, there are seven different levels of freshman math , all year-long, ranging from introduction to calculus (equivalent to AP-Calc) to Math 55 which equips students to do graduate-level math. All, I'm assuming have rigorous curricula, but aimed at students with very different preparations and academic goals in mind.
In the humanities and social sciences, there are also courses aimed at different types of students, with different degrees of difficulty. A freshman seminar will be rather different from a seminar that enrolls juniors and seniors and is open to graduate students as well. </p>
<p>Can you instance a specific college that claims to offer a rigorous curriculum?</p>
<p>Agree that it could mean different things to different people. My college a million years ago was known as "rigorous". To me it also had to do with a fairly benign factor. We covered in 10 weeks of Organic Chem, what was covered at the best state school in a whole 15+ week semester.</p>
<p>My older daughter attended a college, generally described as rigorous.
Not necessarily the same as "competitive admission" because rigorous is what happens when you get there, not what you have to do to get in.</p>
<p>HOwever- unless you are a certain kind of student, this college will appeal to your parents more than it will to you, going by my experience talking to students and parents from my older daughters prep school and my younger daughters magnet high school.</p>
<p>From my perspective, what the rigourous curriculum may mean @ Reed and other colleges like UChicago and Swarthmore, was lots of reading some very demanding, and expectation that you are familiar enough with the reading to discuss in seminars and at a critical level.
Also the writing. ( and editing)</p>
<p>Students who have taken lots of AP classes, attended schools like Lakeside ( day prep), may not want a college where the focus on a liberal arts style education seems to mirror the focus in high school.</p>
<p>More power to you if it does, but some students also may want a college where they can leave the library once in a while, and maybe even get pre-professional coursework.</p>
<p>Alchemy, you edited your first post after I responded and thus my post no longer makes sense in context of your question.</p>
<p>Like Marite, I have not heard colleges offering curricula referred to as "rigorous". There is a range of courses at any college. Also, what is rigorous to one person is not to the next. Usually upper level courses demand something different than introductory courses. Sometimes there is variation from major to major. Also certain degree programs are more rigorous in terms of amount of requirements, etc. than a BA progam. </p>
<p>What is challenging to one student may not be to another. </p>
<p>But in terms of selecting a college, I think some students, and my own children fit this description, care about and seek out how challenging their college will be academically. So, sometimes, a more selective college where the student body OVERALL have met a higher academic standard for admission, might be a more challenging learning environment. So, students seeking a higher challenge may opt to enroll at a more selective college where the student body is of like minded (in terms of academic motivation) or level of students (in terms of level of achievement required to be admitted). That is NOT to say there are not rigorous courses or top students at less selective colleges. But in reverse, there are not students with low academic levels of achievement at the most selective colleges. This affects the learning environment. </p>
<p>I have taught at some colleges where the standard to be admitted is not that high. Sure, there were some excellent students who likely could have attended more selective colleges. But there also were many students whose motivation and level of work was of low quality and this can affect how rigorous the course might be. I had students who could not write well at all and others who did not do the work on time. While this is not acceptable in any learning environment, an "easier" school will perhaps help the student to succeed and at some harder schools, the level of expectations are simply higher to begin with. A student who can't keep up with the rigor of a challenging learning environment is going to fall behind very fast and have trouble succeeding. </p>
<p>I am not saying that the most selective schools are a better education but simply that the level of expectations in class are often higher, the level of work may be harder, the amount of work may be more, and the level of motivation and achievement of the student body generally speaking may create a more rigorous environment than in a less selective school EVEN THOUGH there are kids who attend less selective schools that are just as smart and who will become quiute successful. Either environment will provide a very good education. But certain environments will be more rigorous or challenging for students and it is important to find a learning environment that matches one's own level of motivation and challenge which they seek.</p>
<p>I think when you are speaking about the liberal arts, the top colleges have a LOT LESS "busywork." I have a kid who got much, much better grades at a top college than in high school because my kid simply hates busywork and often fails to do it. That resulted in lower grades in high school as points were deducted for not doing homework or handing it in late or blowing pop quizzes. In college, there were fewer weekly assignments, fewer pop quizzes, etc. There were still problem sets in subjects like math and econ, but in other courses, the requirements of the course were set out at the beginning at there were never unexpected short-term assignments or pop quizzes. (Class participation did count in seminars and sections. ) There were fewer items which formed the basis for grading. A course might have 2-3 essays or short papers, a midterm and a final. Not much busywork there. </p>
<p>Based on a very limited sample of kids, my impression is that the lower down the totem pole you go, as a GENERAL rule the more assignments and quizzes there are. Community college teachers are probably more concerned with whether their students are grasping the concepts they are teaching than are profs at Harvard. That doesn't mean profs at Harvard aren't willing to help a student who comes in during office hours and says "I don't understand what's going on." It's just that my impression is the prof is less likely to keep taking the class's "temperature" so to speak by giving lots of quizzes or homework type assignments to make sure the students are keeping uo in the class and grasp the concepts. There are fewer graded items at the Harvards of the world than at the Borough of Manhattan Community College. Or at least that's my impression. </p>
<pre><code>At top colleges, the reading load is a lot heavier than many kids expect. For someone who is taking four humaniities and social science courses, 1,000-1200 pages of reading a week is not all that unusual. (Many students don't do it all. ) Being able to read quickly and well is a much underrated skill in college success. If you want to estimate how much time you'll have to study outside of class, how quickly and well you read is a very important factor in determining that, at least if you are a humanities or social sciences major.
</code></pre>
<p>A young neighbor was stuggling in a course at a top LAC. She went in to see the prof asking what she could do. He spent the entire meeting explaining how to read the assigned material. Her grade jumped dramatically after she followed his advice. (I can't give you specifics. This is just based on a conversation with her dad. ) </p>
<p>Also using Harvard as an example. Your experience can also vary wildly depending on background and majors. For me, it was easier than high school had been. For some of my less prepared friends it was harder. For some who chose to take more demanding courses (like Math 55!) it was harder.</p>
<p>I don't think there are that many schools that you can't avoid the really rigorous courses if you want to. Caltech and MIT are probably exceptions.</p>
<p>My son is at Caltech. As a high school senior he took math courses at UC Berkeley. His experience is that courses at Caltech are more rigorous. Caltech classes focus on proofs. UC Berkeley math courses were more answer the question. He has had to take the same courses at Caltech that he took at UCB, multivariable calculus, linear algebra and differential equations. UCB the courses were "easy" for him. At Caltech as a frosh he worked his rearend off in multivariable calc, linear algebra and differential equations along with the rest of his courses. Another big difference - at Caltech what the profs present in lectures is not what is on the homework and what is on exams different than what presented in class and on homework. Caltech work is not hours and hours of "mindless work" but is instead hours and hours ofproblem solving (i.e. proofs). I don't think I'm doing a very good job of explaining. But you can go to the Caltech or MIT websites and find the actual homework assignments & exams so you could actual compare the work. I do think its the kind of work that stretches even the best and brightest.</p>
<p>^^ It looks like Caltech, because it is a techie school, can dispense with the kind of math courses that a more comprehensive school like Berkeley (or Harvard) needs to offer to accommodate the needs of students who are in a wider variety of fields. I am sure that Berkeley, like Harvard or MIT or Caltech, offers math courses that are totally proof-based. Math courses that are not tend to cater to students who will not be going into math. So it is not that Caltech's math courses are harder than Berkeley math courses (and Berkeley has a top math department); it's that its range of offerings is more restricted and caters to a more homogeneous student body.</p>
<p>I'm not accustomed to "rigorous" curriculums. I'm attending a decent LAC (top 30) and I'm worried about the challenge that entails. I think the jump from coloring in pictures of atoms to large writing assignments, projects, and tests, might make for a difficult transition. I don't fancy failing out.</p>
<p>marite - the courses my son took at UCB were the basic (53 & 54) math courses for math, science & engineering majors. The undergraduate courses at Caltech are pushing him in a way undergrad courses at Berkeley did not. And he'd already been writing proofs. Its not just about proof writing but the level of understanding & rigor in proofs that is expected at Caltech that wasn't expected at UCB for math, science & engineering majors in their first year.</p>
<p>I don''t know enough about either UCB or Caltech to go into further details. But, judging by Harvard's math courses, there are different levels of rigor, even for students who are headed into math/sciences. Indeed, for some fields, the plug-and-chug version of MV-Calc is recommended over the proof-based ones (and there are two different flavors of proof-based). It is not necessarily a question of which is more difficult or rigorous, but which is more appropriate. For some fields, the more applied, less abstract courses are more suitable. I expect that UCB has a full range of courses ranging from plug and chug to proof-based. Caltech with a more homogeneous student body and more restricted range of offerings, expects all students to take the same challenging courses. But that does not mean that UCB has a less rigorous curriculum. It just has a broader one, catering to a wider range of interests and preparations. Last year, S helped one of his friends with the plug and chug version of MV-Calc. The friends is a premed. It would have been unnecessary, and probably counteproductive for him to do oen of the proof-based MV-Calc classes. </p>
<p>For what it's worth, the 2005 USN&WR ranks UCB's math department #2, jointly with Harvard, Princeton, & Stanford, and Caltech at 8 (below Yale!).
I am of the opinion that such a difference in rankings is meaningless. But by the same token, UCB has to be as "rigorous" as Caltech. It's a matter of students finding and being admitted to the right courses. That's why I think that the idea of a "rigorous curriculum" a bit baffling.</p>
<p>Even Caltech has two levels of some courses - tour was a while ago. (Physics for sure.) But even the easy one assumes a lot of prior knowledge and zips along.</p>