<p>
Sure, there are dumbed down fine arts classes.<br>
But, while science majors may not take all the advanced English courses of an English major but all my kids - even the science majors took English I & II with other Liberal Arts and English majors. These were not ‘dumbed down’.
I don’t know of one university where one can obtain a Chemistry or Biology degree without English and/or writing.</p>
<p>–“I’ve never heard of anyone ever having to change their major because El-Ed was too hard for them.”</p>
<p>LOL–here’s one. I had a (former cheerleader) roommate who failed and had to repeat “Math for Elementary School Teachers” (arithmetic , pretty much–but you know, when you get to fractions and stuff like that, it gets kinda hard!) So, her (physics major) boyfriend was tutoring her. She got pregnant and changed her major to MRS.</p>
<p>*way2school, you sound nervous. If you were admitted to a particular school, it’s because they think you will be successful there so don’t limit yourself by taking what you think will be ‘easy.’ Do what you find interesting. And it’s okay to take something pass/fail if you are worried, or an intro level course even if you have some background or to get tutoring right from the start so you don’t get behind. Form a study group on day one if you are really concerned. </p>
<p>The real shame would be to miss out on something that you might love because you were afraid you couldn’t do it.*
^^^^^
This is the best answer.</p>
<p>Both my kids have learning challenges despite being exceptionally intelligent.
Their majors and colleges are much more difficult than I would take on- but they( are learning) learned to pace themselves, to take classes during the summer so that they could breathe a little easier during the school year.
Taking the easiest course isn’t really the answer, a better choice might be finding the best profs- the ones who are really excited about what they are teaching & will work to find a way so that the students are as involved.
Go to the school bookstore and see what texts are being used to get another idea of the course material, look at prof review sites & see what is going on on campus/ what kind of study groups are available.</p>
<p>There * are majors* that are more time consuming. Majors in the arts, not only require class time, but lots of studio/rehearsal time. Oldest attended a college that assigned a * lot* of reading of original sources-( the required book list for HUM110 required for all freshman has at least 30 titles) humanities majors complained about the science requirements & science majors complained about the humanities.
( At Reed- they * live* to moan)</p>
<p>There are colleges however, that don’t have distribution requirements- some places you would never have to take a history class or a language class if you didn’t want to.</p>
<p>( In our state education is not an undergrad degree)</p>
<p>I think it is more that different colleges may expect a different level of work, rather than which majors are " easier"</p>
<p>Have yet to see a requirement for an English major to take Chem I.</p>
<p>I expect many schools require a lab science in the distribution requirements- for example @ Reed, they could take biology instead of chem or physics ( two units would be the equivalent of a full time one year course)
but alas- no Rocks for Jocks courses
;)</p>
<p>
</code></pre>
<p>re: science reqs.
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Totally, utterly, and completely false. Where on earth do you get this idea? Virtually all good schools, except the rare few with no distribution requirements, require that everyone take a lab science, plus several more courses in scientific/quantitative disciplines. Certainly my S’s school does, mine did.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My LAC did not have a single “rocks for jocks” kind of course. Everyone took the same courses: future majors and dabblers.</p>
<p>I do recall though how often cross-registered MIT students dropped out of English courses at my school when they realized that they were going to get a C. (We, of course, were not allowed to drop courses after the first week, but they could.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Since when did “hours spent in a lab” become the magical thing that alone conveys academic difficulty or distinction? That’s simply ridiculous. I don’t know what you are trying to prove.</p>
<p>Of course, one could maintain that science drones just go to lab, write it up, memorize the textbook, and regurgitate it on the tests. No originality, no individual ideas required: just brute force memorization. No reading 500-1000 pages per week per course–of course, that takes no time at all, right? No hour upon hour, year upon year spent in the studios with those despised music and art students. No hours spent devising original proofs—oh, no, wait, that’s quantitative so I suppose according to you it must be “real” work.</p>