<p>That still does not make Rochester an “open curriculum” college as is sometimes claimed.</p>
<p>I graduated from UR (way before the ‘cluster system’ existed) and my S just started there. He chose UR largely because of the flexibility of the curriculum. I haven’t studied Brown’s system, but a quick skim makes it sound pretty similar to what UR offers. From</p>
<p><a href=“http://brown.edu/Administration/Dean_of_the_College/curriculum/downloads/Lib_Learning_Goals.pdf[/url]”>http://brown.edu/Administration/Dean_of_the_College/curriculum/downloads/Lib_Learning_Goals.pdf</a></p>
<p>“At Brown, rather than specifying these areas, we challenge you to develop your own core. Over four years you will sample courses in the humanities, the social sciences, the life sciences, and the physical sciences…”</p>
<p>So it sounds to me that Brown expects its grads to take some number of classes in all of the disciplines, but that the students get to choose which particular classes to take. Not sure if that is what defines “open curriculum” but, if so, I don’t see why that wouldn’t apply to what UR has.</p>
<p>I feel like we are comparing red apples to green ones. They both are more suited to either cooking or eating but they are both apples 
</p>
<p>Back to the original thread, it seems that UR is changing their admission requirements in keeping with the philosophy of the school. That it is okay to have stronger scores in one area or another and to be acknowledged for it rather than penalized because your English score is much lower than your math score. And by lower, I mean that your Math score is over 700 but your English may only be 650. </p>
<p>I think it is a leap to think that there is some deeper sinister action on their part to increase their rankings.</p>
<p>Speaking as a high school teacher, I applaud UR for this recent change. There are MANY students who excel in certain subjects, but don’t have a super high command of other areas. To assume EVERYONE with talent must score high on English and Math (alone) is absurd. Let these kids show their Bio/History/whatever APs, IBs or subject tests and excel where their niche is rather than being “too low” on their math SAT to make it. It’s hardly the same thing as requiring nothing but a high school GPA and some recommendations. They want to see excellence somewhere. English and math may not be it.</p>
<p>FWIW, I agree that URoc does have an open curriculum except for their one required freshman English(writing) course. Others may define things differently, but having looked at oodles of colleges and their requirements (my own kids and others) there’s a difference. My oldest is at an LAC. My middle is at URoc. They are totally different schools, but each is the right fit for their respective student.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Brown’s degree requirements are here:
[Degree</a> Requirements](<a href=“Complete Your Degree | The College | Brown University”>Complete Your Degree | The College | Brown University)</p>
<p>There is no breadth requirement – students there need only take at least 30 courses over 8 full time semesters, demonstrate competency in writing, and have a concentration (major). ABET-accredited engineering majors are an exception; to meet ABET-accreditation criteria, engineering majors must include some humanities and social studies courses (but does not specify which particular courses or subjects).</p>
<p>Actual open curriculum colleges with no breadth requirements are very few:
[Examples</a> in Action: Our List of Open Curriculum Colleges | Open Jar Foundation](<a href=“http://openjar.org/curricular-freedom-examples-in-action]Examples”>http://openjar.org/curricular-freedom-examples-in-action)</p>
<p>If Rochester has an “open curriculum”, does Berkeley’s College of Engineering have an “open curriculum”? Its breadth requirement specifies a number of courses in humanities and social studies, some of which have to be reading and composition courses, some of which have to be upper division, etc., but no specific courses, subjects, or departments are required.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cynicism, yes, but “leap”? No way.</p>
<p>Any college, including UR, has always been free to discount anything in a student’s application that they so desired. A strong music applicant? Ok, ignore the bio subject test in the Admin Committee.</p>
<p>Thus, the only difference this change makes in the marketing (spin) of the college – to attract more test splitters, and the reporting to USNews and other agencies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. And they want to not-see the test “weakness” (however defined), and not have to report that weakness to the outside world.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Leap or no leap, USNews should remove the ambiguity in the easiest of way … delist all the gamers that offer flexible score reporting.</p>
<p>Easy as pie!</p>
<p>Here is how the criteria for undergrad schools is done at US news</p>
<p>[Methodology:</a> Undergraduate Ranking Criteria and Weights - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2012/09/11/methodology-undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights-2]Methodology:”>http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2012/09/11/methodology-undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights-2)</p>
<p>15% is based on student selectivity of 4 criteria:
acceptance rate, HS standing in the top 10% (National schools), HS standing in the top 25% (Regional schools) and SAT/ACT scores which are from 50% of the 15% or 7.5% out of the 92.5% that comes from other criteria. </p>
<p>The assumption is that if students do not have to show their least strong scores then they won’t send them to UR. The assumption is that students will not send their SAT/and OR ACT scores at ALL.</p>
<p>Remember, the college board does not do score choice, only schools do. If a student has an 800 on Math and a 650 in English in one sitting, the only way a school will see the 800 is if all the scores from that sitting are sent. Students cannot cherry pick. </p>
<p>Agreed there is some population of students who will not send any SAT/ACT but out of the 12,000 who apply how many? And aren’t those same students still in the top 10 or 25% of their class?</p>
<p>The ranking system if full of really unequal criteria. </p>
<p>If high school counselors have so much say in the ranking then we are really in trouble because our counselor were extremely lame and unhelpful. Their input is 33.3% of 22% (national) and 25%( regional). </p>
<p>How about alumni giving. I give nothing to my colleges. Does that mean they are bad schools? No, I live across the country and have no connection to them.</p>
<p>Alumni giving - I had a student from my college remind me over the phone that it helps them in the US News rankings if I give even a token amount. I really don’t care about helping their ranking. I heard something about my D’s college trying to make classes smaller to help in the ranking - not a bad thing to do, even for the wrong reason. It doesn’t matter to me if Rochester is going test flexible - it won’t affect my child’s chances, but it may relieve some other student’s stress.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But this is not what will happen in reality. That Bio/History student with the 500 on SAT Math won’t apply because he/she knows their stats aren’t up to snuff. Yes, they are talented in their field - incredibly talented - but they will look at the 25 - 75 and feel they don’t have a chance. So will their counselor. I’ve seen it happen over and over again. Now, they can apply, put in their AP/IB scores to show (as best they can) that they know their stuff in their field and have access to top notch profs (and research availability) over some college where a 500 SAT Math fits. At URoc, they won’t even need to take ANY math class.</p>
<p>It’s an all around fit for some students - while not hurting those who do excel in English/math.</p>
<p>And quite frankly, that Bio student with a 500 math score should probably NOT apply, because, even if accepted the odds are really long of that student doing very well. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Quite frankly, I disagree. If the Bio/History student has a 5 on the AP test and an 750+ on the SAT 2 and probably a reasonable English/Verbal score, they will do just fine in their niche. At a school where they would be required to take Calc, I’d agree with you as they’d have a hard time with that class, but that’s not the case at URoc.</p>
<p>Working in a public high school for years has shown me that kids (and their abilities) can be quite varied. ;)</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I’m not sure what you mean by this. Of course CollegeBoard does score choice, it was their invention. If a student got an 800 on Math and 650 on Lit (even if it’s the same sitting) then they can choose to only send math.</p>
<p>If you want to send a regular SAT 1 score that has Math, CR and Writing you must send the all the scores from one sitting, even if you don’t like one of the scores. </p>
<p>You cannot ask the college board to just send your Math from your first sitting, your CR from a second try and Writing from a third. They will send all three tests with all three scores.</p>
<p>Score choice is the total score of your best scores, not that the colleges don’t get to see the others.</p>
<p>I believe before score choice, you could only have a best total score from a single sitting, not a composite of several sittings.</p>
<p>I think you’re thinking of superscoring.</p>
<p>Superscoring: Some colleges only use the top section scores, regardless of test date.
Score Choice: CollegeBoard’s policy that you can choose which complete tests to send to each college.</p>
<p>Before score choice, you had to send your entire SAT testing history.</p>
<p>In any case, under UR’s flexible testing policy, why would any student care about sending only a math section, or only a critical reading section? It clearly states that students can send either a SAT 1/ACT (implying all the sections, as you can’t split it obviously) OR 2 Subject/AP/other tests.</p>
<p>Sorry, you are right about superscoring vs score choice. And I guess your second point is the point. Only students who have taken AP tests, SAT 2 or other tests would be the type to apply in first place.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The IQs of some geniuses are well below genius levels. And SATs are well correlated with IQ. One study recently found it to be .81. </p>
<p>Richard Feynman had a tested IQ of 125 in high school, decent, but far from spectacular. I saw a chart that linked up SATs and IQ based on deviation from the mean, and this would give Feynman an SAT verbal/math equivalent of about 1240. He went on to be a Nobelist and one of the great physicists recent history. He abhorred psychometrics because his 125 IQ would not have predicted that he could have invented new math theorems in high school or finish every physics course offered at MIT before he finished his sophomore year. </p>
<p>Watson was 124 and Crick 115. I recall an interview with Watson where he said he’d attend advanced biochem seminars and didn’t have a clue. He did say he had kind of a savant skill where he could look at data and imagine a conforming three-dimensional object–just the thing to think up the double helix. </p>
<p>SATs can’t measure that kind of stuff.</p>
<p>Ummm, a typical Bio major requires Calc. A typical Bio major requires Chem, which requires math reasoning skills to do well. So I stand by my assertion: a 500 math student will be in a world of hurt trying to major in Bio, or any science, at a top school like UR.</p>
<p>This paper [[1011.0663</a>] Nonlinear Psychometric Thresholds for Physics and Mathematics](<a href=“http://arxiv.org/abs/1011.0663][1011.0663”>[1011.0663] Nonlinear Psychometric Thresholds for Physics and Mathematics) found that, while an SAT M score < 600 indicates very low probability of success as a math or physics major, no such threshold exists for other majors, including biology.</p>
<p>Perhaps the biology major with an SAT M of 500 is more likely to struggle in freshman calculus, but will not need any math more advanced than that, unlike math or physics majors.</p>