<p>For those who also received this in the mail, what are your opinions on it? Worth it? Will it give you a head start? And would someone care to tell me about the Integrated Science course or whatever it's called? What's the difference? Thanks a bunch.</p>
<p>I find it very interesting, personally. But I do not meet the requirement...:( (AP Calc BC....I'm an int'l...what do they expect!)</p>
<p>Anyway, they said the engineering part of the integrated course has no counterpart in the Pton curriculum, so that's surely a big plus (which I'm very keen to take advantage of....)</p>
<p>But I do remember reading somewhere on CC that the courseload is deadly...</p>
<p>I thought about taking this course but it just seems too much time.</p>
<p>I think the whole point of this sequence is that as the name suggests- an integrated science sequence. It probably means that you learn the physics and maths but you learn it all together. Eg. You learn how to apply the maths to the physics directly rather than having separate classes. So in the end you have mastery of both the basic maths principles of engineering as well as a better understanding how how all that maths applies itself into physics. I think its great if your doing engi or you want a challenge.</p>
<p>Am I right?</p>
<p>Yeah, you're pretty much right, Kjoodles. It was new last year, so they were kind of the guinea pigs, so hopefully they've improved it this year. But if you place out of physics (5 on AP I believe), I would suggest not taking this course--even if you do get the little extra engineering stuff, it's not worth re-taking physics.</p>
<p>What if you have 4's on AP Phyisics C, but you've got tons of math at a local university? Same deal right? Don't waste your time re-learning all the math you know, agreed? And are we sure there's not all that much engineering advantage?</p>
<p>i don;t actually know anyone who took that class, although i am in the integrated science sequence. If you;ve already taken all the classes then its pointless, and somewhat unfair to everyone else in the class. I'm pretty sure that there wouldn't be an advantage per se to be in the class, other than getting to know professors better... but if youve placed out of lots of intro classes anyway, youll be able to take upper level smaller classes sooner and meet the professors that way</p>
<p>Yeah, OrbitJ, I got the impression that the EMP sequence is kind of a nice new twist on the same intro classes, but it's not anything great. In terms of the 'engineering advantage', sure, it might show you cool ways that math and physics are integrated by building a car or a robot or something, but when it comes down to it, you'll still have to take the same intro to engineering courses (whether it be chemical, civil, whatever), as everyone else. Just depends I guess on how much you want the different approach that EMP gives.</p>
<p>I didn't think about it much either, until I talked to an engineer '09-er at my local Princeton Send-Off Reception. She was in the EMP program last year, and she reccommended it. She said that the class size was smaller and the intro physics was definitely better than the regular one. She also said that the math was much more difficult/there was too much of it, but they're probably going to change that (like Voovi16 said, they were the guinea pigs of the program). Now I'm starting to rethink whether I want to apply for it or not, she definitely made it sound more intriguing than the ordinary sequence. (Although she did say its more work.)</p>
<p>Skysongx, did she mention anything about the project-based EMP 194 course? Build anything awesome?</p>
<p>how is EMP different than the integrated science class with phy/chem/cos... hhmm...</p>
<p>Like, does the emp class take around 2 classes or just 1?</p>
<p>Hmm...she did say that a chunk of time is spent building a rocket, but I don't remember discussing the details. (Sorry!) It is a major ongoing project, though, and she said it was rather exciting.</p>
<p>Amnesia, the EMP program is two classes each semester. It covers intro physics and multivariable calculus -- but focusing more on how the two subjects come together -- as well as and extra engineering portion revolving around (quoted from the letter) "key issues in modern engineering, including energy conversion and its environmental impact, robotic remote sensing, and multimedia and information transmission over wireless networks...a combination of lectures, guest lectures, and hands-on projects."
(Sorry if I just restated what you already knew.)</p>
<p>I'd recommend EMP if you'd otherwise be planning to take PHY 103/104 and MAT 201/202 -- the equivalent level of courses, if I recall correctly. The sequence wasn't available when I was a freshman, so I can't comment specifically about the experience. However, I know that given the opportunity to take an integrated course, I would have. Having one block of coursework to think about rather than two is helpful, even if it's twice as large. Also, it can be difficult to get a feel for the different engineering departments before the end of freshman year when major selection takes place -- the engineering-themed projects are supposed to help the undecided. Finally, I'd guess that the overall quality of instruction in EMP is probably better, given that the equivalent math courses are often taught by difficult-to-understand foreign grad students.</p>
<p>You'll have a chance to discuss this decision with your advisor and peer interactors in the fall. If you're clearly over-prepared or under-prepared, I wouldn't worry about missing anything important by taking something else.</p>
<p>anyone understand why, if you have AP chem credit, they recommended taking MAT 202 in soph year (acc. the letter)?</p>
<p>Because with AP Chem credit, that frees up a spot in your schedule that normally would have been filled with a pretty time-demanding class. So without a chem class, you'll have more time to devote to MAT 202, instead of putting it off until sophomore year.</p>