Are the local parents looking at in-state publics? I live in VA in a poor district. Only ~10% go to a 4 year college. The gov school program is very popular with our top students. It’s DE for math/English/science junior and senior years held off site for half the day.
Most of the kids here (almost all) go to in-state publics. The credits just transfer over. No need to pay for or worry about test scores. Clean transfer. And my older S went to a private (W&L) and they took the credits as well. He was thrilled not to have to take any science in college. He’s a math and money guy.
But it didn’t help either of mine graduate any earlier despot having so many credits. I think W&L capped it around 28. (S probably had close to 80). I didn’t have much input on his schedule, but I’m not sure he could have graduated much faster, especially since he studied abroad.
JMU took them all around 50-60. But younger S’ major had the classes structured so there was no way to get out early. But, with so many credits, he was registering with grades 2 years older so he got everything he wanted when he wanted without having to do the honors program which he was not interested in at all. At JMU you have to take a lot of extra classes he wasn’t interested in.
Most of the kids’ peers in the gov school program graduated in 4 years. I have heard of a few doing it 3-3.5. But I sort of wanted them there for the full 4 years to have the full experience. Both got good scholarships so $$$ wasn’t too bad.
So a school like UIUC that gives credit for AP score 3 and above might save you some semesters but as stated something like engineering it won’t. Also if doing internships and co-ops this easily can turn 4 years to longer if their not done in the summers. Even with Aps etc my son was able to eliminate some classes but he choose to take deeper /higher level classes. He was able to double minor in things that were of great interest to him. If he didn’t double minor he could of graduated a semester earlier but taking the extra classes actually helped in landing his current job. Our attitude was to get as much out of your undergraduate time while there. So many cool, interesting classes to take and they only do undergrad once. Might take advantage of everything college has to offer.
Purdue doesn’t exclude co-op students from the graduation rate so my D technically graduated in 5 years even though it was only 8 semesters (and 8 semesters of tuition). IMO, that’s very misleading.
My oldest got her business degree and masters in accounting (5 year program) in 4 1/2 years, my dd19 got her bs in exercise science in 3, dd21 could’ve graduated business in 3 but is taking extra classes to prep for a few actuary exams she’s taking before graduation. Financially we’d like them to graduate as early as possible.
Yes; our in state flagship is very competitive. Think top 10% of graduating-class-only competitive. We also have a far lower-than-average admittance rate for a geographic area for top 10 LACs and universities because over 65% of local HS graduates attend 4 year colleges and universities. A lot of out of state publics from across the country recruit here constantly. It changes the strategy game considerably to live here and it adds to the stress. I hear about it at every parent function, in every parent group, starting in kindergarten.
We also have some very good non-flagship state schools, but they are considerably under -resourced in favor of the flagship.
I wonder (but will never know) if people are gravitating away from APs because the tests are more difficult relative to dual enrollment. They certainly cover more topic breadth without sacrificing depth relative to dual enrollment options. This is shown clearly on the College Board website and the various community college websites. Everyone I know who does dual enrollment is coming out of the program with high grades. I’m sure they deserve it, but there is no comparable test at the end like AP.
Besides your opinion, or the unsupported opinion on the Coursera page, what is the evidence for this claim, and what time frame are you referring to when students took less time to graduate?
A stronger student who comfortably affords the college will have a higher likelihood of graduating in 4 years (or at all) than a weaker student who needs the maximum loans and work earnings to pay for college.
My daughter’s bf - wealthy and at a wealthy school with easy AP standards (U of Denver with a finance major) will graduate in 3 years - no summer school - given the credits he came in with. Has a great internship this summer too so hopefully will translate to a full time job somewhere afterward.
It’s hard to know up front - but you need luck. The right school but also the right major and right AP - since some are given credit for the exact same thing. And one doesn’t know the school in 9th or 10th grade and even 11th and sometimes 12th.
Still, I’m a believer in the student studying in hs what is best for them without planning for what credits they may or may not get or may or may not be duplicative. My daughter loved AP Research and Seminar…still they got her the same credit as the AP English or Language class. But I’m glad she took Seminar, etc. - it was her favorite class so it wasn’t wasted.
Others repeat their AP classes. For example, when we visited Colorado School of Mines, the students on the student panel told students not to take credit for math and science but to take them again. Others here disagree - but that was the guidance from the engineering students - and sure enough, my son took the credit (different school) and WD from math first semester (although he says it was a bad prof and not the content and he did get an A the next semester - but i’m sure having sat through 2/3 the previous was a big help).
And while not many can afford it, I would only want my child to attend four years…not free. They have their entire lives to work.
But I think this question can’t simply be answered - there are too many variables.
D24 started taking AP classes her sophomore year, based solely on her interests. Later that year, I realized we should probably start looking into colleges and realized that the ones she had taken (Computer Science A and Seminar) weren’t that useful from a college credit perspective at the places I looked at. Huh, I thought, good thing she took ones based on content she enjoyed.
When I really dug into things, I realized that more and more colleges seem to want most core curriculum classes to specifically not be through AP credit, and are giving AP classes lower level credit in the subject areas that looks good until you realize it doesn’t satisfy core requirements, major requirements or even pre-requisites. This is not how AP sells itself. If they wanted to call themselves a standardized honors curriculum, that would be more honest, but wouldn’t have nearly the draw.
DE on the other hand…well, in North Carolina the NC community colleges have articulation agreements with NC public universities, so there are transfer equivalencies for most core requirement and some major requirement classes. D24 will have pretty close to an associate’s by the time she graduates high school, which depending on major could absolutely save time at NC public universities, including UNC Chapel Hill.
I think the fact that many colleges are not counting AP classes as “real” credit any more would answer the OP’s question as to whether they are doing their job (NO). I think that would also lead to higher resourced schools abandoning APs and developing their own honors curricula that is not teaching to the AP test, and from what I read on here, that seems to be happening. Lower resourced places are turning to DE.
Can you elaborate – not sure I follow. Are you saying that admission rates to top colleges is statistically harder because the local district/regional 4-year college attendance rate is high (at over 65%)? Why would that make admissions rates lower?
Our public high school has a 4-year college matriculation rate of 84%. I created a spreadsheet during the college application process of the school’s admission rate to the top 50-ish colleges (plus some safeties) compared against the national admission rates for the same schools. In a majority of cases the two rates tracked close to each other. Where it didn’t, it tended to be higher for our school than the national average, with just a few exceptions where it swung the other way (and none of those exceptions were T10 schools). The HS is extremely competitive (both my older kids went to selective colleges and felt there was competitive pressure or course rigor there than in HS).
So of course its very competitive to get into top schools, but those schools also end up admitting more than they would at a typical public high school, so it balances out.
That depends on where the dual enrollment is at and how good the high school is. You are coming from what sounds like a good HS with a dual enrollment option at a community college, so not surprising the HS course is more rigorous. But many HS courses (even APs) are not great and some DE is at 4 year colleges with harder courses. The DE option at our HS is extremely hard to qualify for, and is held at a T5 college – definitely not perceived as easier than the APs. In fact, one of the (many) eligibility requirements is that you already completed the AP and received a 5 as a pre req to consideration for the DE program.
Yes this is us. The APs were somewhat better when older S was at the school, but even then 4s or 5s were not that common. By the time younger S got there, those teachers retired and the replacements weren’t good. 2s were common. 3s were great. In contrast with that, the gov school classes are very good. Strong teachers and kids who all really want to be there and go to college.
And then with the gov school program those kids still also took AP in the afternoon, but for the more minor ones. And many of those were online through virtual Virginia. On paper, their resumes look impressive. And all the kids do do well at uva, Virginia Tech, W&M, JMU, etc. I can’t think of any kid from the program around my kids’ ages that dropped out of college or transferred. but not for one minute do I think the classes were on the level of a prep school.
The only data available where I live is district-based, not based on one particular public school, so I’m not sure I can answer your question. If you google “school district name + interested data point”, one of the top 5 results will be the data I am speaking of, several years ago. That’s all the data that is publicly available. Any other conclusions would just be anecdotal, so I can’t do an apples-to-apples comparison with the data/information you are giving about where you live.
DE here is not hard to qualify for if a student is on track to graduate by 10th grade, based on observation. I don’t have the exact percentage who participate, but I observationally, I’d say top 50% of each graduating class. I do know that a certain GPA is required and a vice principal has to approve it.
We don’t have charter high schools here so I can’t compare.
If your district does have lower admission rates to top colleges, I would be surprised if it is because the district is too competitive.
Yeah, DE like AP is all over the board from one school or district to another. It sounds common place at your school and not super competitive. Whereas at ours, here’s an example of what would be required: In math, a student would first have to have completed through Multivariable Calculus and Linear Algebra at the HS, received straight A’s (no A-'s) on all math classes taken at the HS and received a 5 on the AP Calc BC test. For science, a student would have had to complete the highest level course available in the subject at the HS (AP Physics C or Organic Chemistry, which comes after AP Chemistry), received straight A’s on every science course taken in HS, received 5’s on every AP science course taken (in both cases, it this includes sciences unrelated to the course subject). In all cases it requires a teacher letter of recommendation, a recommendation from the counselor, giving up 2 class periods per DE course taken and even if you clear all that you are put in last priority versus the college students (rightly so), and only can take the course if there are open slots, which you only find out the day before the class starts. In the end, probably a dozen people a semester clear all those steps, most of them in foreign language as it is pretty rare to have been able to top out the math and sciences by junior year in time to apply for the program – though it does happen.
On the plus side, there is a nominal $50 processing fee and no other cost – the university offers the courses free to those who clear all the eligibility requirements. And you end up in classes from a top school.
The California State University system shows increasing graduation rates (and some declines too) as detailed here:
One issue though: CSU administration really pushes graduation rate as a metric, which sounds good in theory, but in practice often means a push to ease standards and requirements:
“Another pillar to boost graduation rates: overhauling large vital courses where a higher percentage of low-income students and students of color receive Ds and Fs. That idea isn’t without controversy, raising concerns in some corners that professors and lecturers may be pressured to become easier graders.” https://calmatters.org/education/2021/11/cal-state-graduation-rates/
“> Throughout the CSU system, professors of classes with high failure rates are being urged by administrators to reconsider teaching methods and possibly retraining. Administrators insist this is not done threateningly. However, some faculty members, while supportive of helping more students succeed, are worried that untenured and part-time professors, in particular, could be pushed by their departments to raise grades no matter what.
The graduation initiative “has created intense pressure to reduce failure rates so that students can graduate, and to reduce the impact of bottleneck classes,” warned a report issued last year by a committee of Fresno State’s Academic Senate.”
This reminds me of the NYU (corrected) chemistry professor issue months ago. A lot of the students interviewed basically took the position that if students are failing a course be definition that is a failure of the professor who didn’t motivate or teach in a way that succeeded with the students.
Parents are spending big bucks. But not for failure !! So there’s expectation that their money is reciprocated with a fine result.
Still you’d hope kids are learning and mastering materials. But if everyone is bombing, either the pre reqs weren’t strong enough or more likely you stink as a teacher.
One could read rate my professor to see. And yes the situation would need to be addressed. Like restaurants or hotels, there are varied level of quality, even in the same brand.
Note that most CSUs are not that selective in admissions – the relatively popular forum targets like CPSLO and CS at SJSU are outliers compared to most CSU admission (the less selective admissions means more enrollment in remedial courses and less AP credit being brought in). They also serve a large proportion of commuter students and those from low income families. CSUs also have relatively voluminous general education requirements.
Pell grant, first-generation-to-college, URM, and male students tend to have substantially lower 4-year graduation rates than non-Pell-grant, non-first-generation-to-college, non-URM, and female students in the CSU data.
totally agree, and I’d add: Good counseling/advising (to make sure that GE’s are completed on a timely basis and student remains on track to graduate ‘on time’.)
True, they aren’t the typical forum targets, but the CSUs are more representative of the overall landscape of the university system that the vast majority of college students are enrolled in.
Anyway, I brought up the articles more as a caveat for interpreting graduation rate changes. While it is sometimes seen as a universal positive to increase them, there are can be underlying policies that are driving these that can be more problematic. Administrators love to point to the top-line stats, but not to the details behind them.
I couldn’t help but notice that the same UC stats you referenced showing increased graduation rates over time also demonstrated significant grade inflation over time.
Speaking of remedial courses, that has been a huge issue in California:
Eliminating testing and non-credit remedial course requirements can be highly problematic if adequate support (= massive funding increases) is not provided.