Placement for Courses Beyond Regular AP

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Rochester
1

<p>This mainly refers to Mathematics. I'm wondering a little about how my placement in mathematics would work, since I finished AP Calc BC with a 5 as a Sophomore and have taken a course in Calculus 3 offered by my High School (as a Junior) and am currently taking a course in Linear Algebra at the University of Colorado in Boulder. I assume the credit from CU would be more easily transferred, but I was thinking that maybe my Calculus 3 class would allow me to take a test that would allow me to test out of MATH 173Q (Calculus III Honors).</p>

<p>Also, similarly, I was wondering if credit was given for IB courses as well, more specifically with IB Physics HL, IB Math HL, IB English HL, IB Spanish SL, and IB World History SL.</p>

<p>Thanks for the help.</p>

2

<p>Cider, the Quest sequence is designed for theoretical mathematicians and there is a substantial emphasis in doing original and independent proofs. Generally, you’d only be granted credit for 173Q only IF you can pass the placement exam AND you want to enroll in 174Q. The Quest sequence requires that you take ALL the courses in the sequence.</p>

<p>If you want to “place out” of Calc 3, I’d suggest you ask to take the 164 exam. 164 is the standard Calc 3 that most people take (physical sciences, com sci, engineering, math, applied math) </p>

<p>My D also had Calc 3 and linear analysis in high school. She sat in on 174Q the first couple weeks of her first semester and decided she really didn’t want to do the Quest sequence because it was too hard to drop into the middle of sequence. (She’s also not a theorist…)</p>

<p>And Cider, my d said the linear algebra at UR covered substantially different topics than her linear alegbra did in HS. (Her HS class actually covered more advanced material, but a different spread of topics.) You also need to be aware that the math dept is reluctant to allow transfer credit–from anywhere- for courses beyond calc 3. Credit is allowed on a case by case basis only and only after you have presented a complete course description and a full curricular outline for the class. </p>

<p>I think I remember seeing somewhere that the math department would not allow transfer credit at all for coursework beyond Calc 3 (for math majors?). But I’m not 100% sure about that. I remember this because I was disappointed my D couldn’t take upper level classes at our state U here in town. There’s a math prof here at our local State U is who an absolutely outstanding teacher and he teaches ODEs/PDEs every summer.</p>

<p>At UR, AP and IB scores are mostly used for placement or perhaps in some cases gen ed credits. They will not count toward your major requirements. Nor will they allow you to escape freshman writing. Everyone has to take one of the freshman writing seminars. Also for IB courses, I’m pretty sure you need to have taken HL to get credit/advanced standing.</p>

3

<p>So they won’t accept credit for Differential Equations?</p>

4

<p>Case by case basis. You’ll have to petition the math department. Plus provide any documentation the department requests–official transcript, course description, curriculum guide. It may be wise to try to get in contact with the math dept chair over the summer and see what his guidance is.</p>

<p>But I can tell you that will not be able to pre-register for any upper level math class over the summer (during freshman pre-registration). You will have to wait until you get to campus in the fall and meet with your advisor to get approval for any class above Calc 3. </p>

<p>I have 2 daughters at 2 different schools. Both are math majors. I was surprised at how much course content varies from place to place.</p>

5

<p>Cider,
The problem here like WayOutWestMom said is that 173 is theoretical. It is nothing (and I mean nothing) like the math you are used to taking. A more reasonable attempt would be to try to test out of 163. This is “normal” calculus and really only has science and math majors in it- don’t be fooled by the honors title for 173.</p>

6

<p>Are you saying that 163 has only science and math majors in it while 173 has who in it instead? It also looks to me like 164 is most closely related to what I have taken than 163 (which makes sense since it’s generally taken before 173).</p>

7

<p>Sorry, I misread what you wrote. I had that you were taking DiffEq in my mind.
There are three math sets- 140’s, 160’s, and 170’s.
140’s is generally taken by biology students, non-math majors and those who don’t need technical. 160’s is for students planning to major in mathematics, computer science, physics, chemistry, or engineering. The 160 series shows you how to literally do calculus and is more difficult than the 140’s series (which is more basic). 170’s is for those who love math (can’t really take if you are an engineer, chemistry major because then you will have no clue how to do the problems presented in later classes). It will not teach you how to solve different diffeq, multivariable problems, etc. persay, but rather goes into the theory behind them.
You don’t take 164 and then take 173. You take either the 160 series or the 170 series if you are going to be a math major.
And you cannot in anyway test out of 173. You have never been exposed to what they do in 173. [EDIT: Sorry, made a mistake]
The 173 attrition rate is extremely high because of how difficult it is.</p>

8

<p>hopkinslax has it exactly right…</p>

<p>Unless you’re going into theoretical math, you need to take the 160 series. If your HS calc 3 class covered mostly differential equations, that would be equivalent 163; if was full coverage multivariable calculus, then it was more probably equivalent to 164. 165 is linear algebra with differential equations. </p>

<p>You really need a very strong grounding in the skills taught in the 160 series classes before attempting 235. </p>

<p>Please remember that just because two math courses have the same name, it doesn’t mean they’re equivalent. (And that’s why the math dept requires documentation to grant credit/placement for advanced math classes.)</p>

<p>IIRC, cider, you’re interested in physics…you need to take the 160 series. The 170 series will not be useful for what you want to do.</p>

9

<p>Er, sry, I meant 164 being generally taken before 163, not 173.</p>

<p>However, I am planning on majoring in Physics and/or Math, and I do love Math. Looking at the actual description of 174Q, since I can’t seem to find the description with the topics for 173Q, I have covered all of the topics it mentioned: limits, continuity, and differentiation, extrema, gradients, Taylor’s theorem. Also line, surface, and volume integrals, Green’s theorem, Divergence theorem, Stokes’ theorem. </p>

<p>Also, simply saying that I have never been exposed to what they do in 173 tells me absolutely nothing, especially since my Calculus 3 class included proofs for essentially every single topic we learned, including Green’s Theorem, Stoke’s Theorem, and the Divergence Theorem. Looking over the practice midterms for 174, I know how to do every single one of the problems, including problems dealing with delta epsilon proofs. If you could tell me what exactly it is that would make the stuff in 173 topics that I have not been exposed to, I’d be better equipped to determine whether that statement is true or not, especially since my class included proofs for every new theorem we learned, though I will still talk this over with my Calculus 3 teacher, who said he’d be able to tell whether or not I was prepared for certain courses based on the descriptions and the texts used (he used to be a Math professor at Harvey Mudd, and he modeled the class after one there).</p>

<p>Although this might be moot anyways, since it says that 174 is only offered in the Spring, so it would make sense for me to just do 173 in the Fall and 174 in the Spring, since I hope to have a course in both Physics and Math every semester if I can help it, and I can be placed in 173 because of my 5 in AP Calc BC.</p>

<p>Sorry if I seemed sort of snappy in one of those paragraphs. It’s just that you don’t know what I’ve been exposed to and I don’t know exactly (the word “theory” doesn’t tell me enough) what it is that would potentially make the 170 set (more specifically 173 and 174) stuff that I have not been exposed to, and I like to be able to know for sure whether I could make an educated opinion or not on something like this.</p>

<p>Edit: was working on this while you posted, WOWM. As far as theoretical math goes, I’d always choose both theoretical math and theoretical physics over applied math and applied physics. I’m into theory far more than application.</p>

<p>I know that having the same names doesn’t mean their equivalent, but I haven’t been given sufficient information to determine their equivalence. I do know that it was much more equivalent to 164 than 163.</p>

10

<p>At this point, I think you need to wait until you get on campus and can talk to an advisor in the Math department. You can then ask your specific questions and receive specific answers.</p>

11

<p>Anyways, I talked to my math teacher about it and he said that the class he taught has 90% overlap with 164, so I’ll probably test out of that. I’ll also be bringing my exams and finals from last year to show the difficulty of the course (plus what textbook it was taught out of). He suggested 163 to 174 as an alright idea (with 163 having some new stuff for me and 174 going more in-depth into the topics that I’ve learned), although I don’t know whether they’d allow that or not, but we’ll see.</p>