Math 126 at UW vs. Math 153 + 254 at Bellevue College?

<p>I'm currently a student at Bellevue College, with a goal of transferring into UW Bothell's BS Computer Science Software Engineering program. The program only requires up to Calculus 2, but I think I might try to minor in Math, so I will definitely need Calculus 3 at some point. It looks like if you take Math 153 (Calculus 3) at Bellevue College, it only transfers over as Math 1XX. You have to take Math 153 and Math 254 (Calculus 4) to get the Math 126 credit (plus a Math 2XX credit, which won't help towards the Math minor). I'm wondering if there's any benefits to taking these two classes at Bellevue College instead of just taking the one at UW. Is UW's Math 126 more difficult, graded on a curve, or something else that would make it less desirable?</p>

<p>I forgot to add, if I wait to take Math 126 at UW, there will be one year between Calculus 2 and Calculus 3. If I take Math 153 and 254 at Bellevue College, then I can pretty much go through without any major gaps.</p>

<p>I would recommend taking the classes at BC for several reasons. The classes are cheaper and if you get a class that uses Hoffman’s textbook, then it only costs 20 dollars. In addition, transferring in the middle of a series can be difficult. From what I hear, calc classes at the UW usually don’t allow any kind of graphing calculator. Instead, the problems are more linear and you can only use a scientific calculator.</p>

<p>If you’ve taken calc 2 a BC, then you are over the most difficult class of this series IMO. I enjoyed calc 3 and calc 4 as they tend to be more straight forward. Calc 3 was computation-heavy while calc 4 was more about concepts and visualization. The first half of calc 4 was really an intro to vectors and 3D surfaces with little to no calculus ironically (cross product, dot product, etc.) while the second half was vector and multivariable calculus (partial derivatives, double integrals, Lagrange multipliers, etc). Overall, I felt calc 3 was the easiest of the series.</p>

<p>BC also offers linear algebra and differential equations which are probably required for a math minor anyways—like at UW Seattle. Last quarter, I was taking diff eq and calc 4 at the same time and found diff eq to be much more challenging yet rewarding than calc 4. </p>

<p>Great answer, thanks! One other question. Due to needing to take all my classes at night, I would be taking Math 254 before Math 153. Both classes have Math 152 as a pre-req (254 doesn’t require 153). In your experience, were there topics covered in 254 that you learned in 153, or were they completely separate?</p>

<p>@mikeh5 Math 254 and Math 153 are generally different. However, they both briefly touch upon polar and parametric coordinates and equations that were also kinda in calc 2. In 254, you will need to know how to convert coordinates between spherical, cylindrical, and rectangular coordinates in 3D; which isn’t too bad.</p>

<p>However, both classes implement concepts you’ve learned in calc 1 and 2. If you’re going to take 254 and 153, I would recommend you nail down things like “u-substitution,” integration by parts, and partial fraction decomposition from calc 2 as those will be prevalent in at least both of these classes. Trig-substitution gets no love and was only used in my differential equations class, once.</p>

<p>Overall, 153 and 254 are vastly different; you probably won’t be missing out if you took 254 first. This is because both classes have different themes. The important aspects of 153 are the definitions and ways to determine the convergence and divergence of series and sequences (e.g. ratio test, integral test, etc.) and the ability to evaluate transcendental functions with Taylor and Maclaurin series as well as determine the ‘error’. In 254, it generally focuses on introducing 3D functions, how to do calculus with them, and multivariable calculus. All these concepts will be fleshed out more if you decide to take Math 255, vector calculus AKA ‘calc 5’.</p>

<p>If you want the skim over the course materials for these classes, here is the open-source Hoffman textbook:
<a href=“Calculus, Contemporary Calculus, Hoffman”>http://scidiv.bellevuecollege.edu/dh/Calculus_all/Calculus_all.html&lt;/a&gt;
As a caveat, it seems like the author gave up near the end because section 13.8 and chapter 14 is riddled with errors which frustrated the hell out of me when I was taking that class.</p>

<p>Edit: Another reason to take those classes here is because the instructors at BC tend to be more lenient on beneficial curves than at UW.</p>