<p>If medical school admission isn’t a slap in the face to the criteria, I can’t think of what is. =P</p>
<p>I think it entirely depends on what you want out of a college education. If you are going with the intent to become a more educated well rounded person then yes a variety of courses in addition to the major is a positive. If you are planning on going into a profession or trade liked medicine, engineering, etc. then doesn’t make as much sense to take a variety of classes. My kids are at a liberal arts college and the list pretty much mirrors what they are required to take in addition to their major. The thing about rankings is you can base them on whatever criteria you want…there is no ONE perfect ranking system yet delivered. Take all “rankings” with a grain of salt or use the results to align with your beliefs…it really doesn’t matter much in the long run.</p>
<p>University of Washington … we got an F!</p>
<p>I’m glad… it means I get to CONCENTRATE on my major (Computer Science) rather than taking HISTORY classes!</p>
<p>
Absolutely. But does that mean that these “variety of courses” must be as narrowly defined as this group defines it? </p>
<p>My d’s school also got an F because it has loose distribution requirements but no specific course requirements. And yet it’s an excellent school and the kids are excited about trying new things and learning new subjects that they want to study, not just things that they have to study.</p>
<p>Looked at my kid’s schools. They don’t count inter-disciplinary studies as part of the core subjects. Isn’t the ability to integrate knowledge part of what colleges are supposed to do. My kids did core courses in HS. They are ready to move on.</p>
<p>
from [url=<a href=“http://www.seas.harvard.edu/directory/lewis]Harry”>http://www.seas.harvard.edu/directory/lewis]Harry</a> R. Lewis ? Harvard School of Engineering and Applied Sciences<a href=“Took%20two%20seconds%20to%20find%20that%20info%20ginab591.”>/url</a> He’s an interesting guy, very charismatic lecturer, taught the computers for dummies course for years.</p>
<p>That said I disagree with him on what constitutes a college education. I think you should have been exposed to all that stuff in high school. (Though I do admit that I regret I never took Economics in college.)</p>
<p>The University of Chicago only rates a B, despite a strong core curriculum. Why? </p>
<ul>
<li><p>It only requires three quarters of a foreign language, not three semesters (although it claims its quarters are equivalent to semesters). No credit.</p></li>
<li><p>It requires history (“civilization”), but not necessarily U.S. history. (In fact, I don’t think there are any U.S.-focused courses that satisfy this requirement.) No credit. The rating is somewhat apologetic about this, noting the excellence of the civ courses.</p></li>
<li><p>No Economics requirement. The rating fails even to note that the required three-quarter Social Science course sequence requires everyone to read a good deal of both Adam Smith and Karl Marx, and to think about economics and other social sciences as ways of apprehending reality.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>When you go to a world-class restaurant, you get to choose from a wide range of foods. When you fly on an airplane, you get to eat what the airline thinks you should eat. According to this ranking, the airplane food is the better dining experience because those in charge make sure that you get a meat, a vegetable, and a dessert - even if it’s frozen and reheated. Left to your own free will, who knows what you’ll learn . . . I mean eat?</p>
<p>This ranking is not only absurd, it’s profoundly arrogant. If Dr. Lewis wants to prescribe what my son’s college curriculum should be, then he’s welcome to pay for it.</p>
<p>I hate to say this because this is the first list I’ve seen where my Alma Mater blows the Ivy League out of the water, but this list is just silly. </p>
<p>It’s as if they have never heard of AP classes or high school students also being duel enrolled at a community college. </p>
<p>What an odd list and what an odd organization.</p>
<p>Personally, I think the information collected is useful in that it’s good to see which schools have such requirements and which don’t. Using the letter grades without examining and thinking about the reason each school got what it got, though, is as silly as using other rankings without thinking about what the numbers/rankings mean.</p>
<p>Except that the site rejects school’s requirements with no reason at all, and in the case of the University of Maryland College Park gives flat out incorrect information.</p>
<p>So it isn’t even a good place for research.</p>
<p>They missed out Latin, Piano, Cookery and Basic Home Repair.</p>
<p>Economics should be replaced by Accounting. Moral Hygiene might be good too.</p>
<p>Both my kids’ schools got C’s. Both had a “no” after foreign language, although D’s school requires it unless you test out of it (nowadays most kids have 3 years of FL in hs and are able to test out) and S’s school allows you to either test out, or substitute a grouping of 3 classes about a particular area of the world (for example, Russian history, Russian literature, and Politics of Eastern Europe) which might give you more insight into a foreign culture than a foreign language grammar class would.</p>
<p>Actually, when I first saw this list, instead of requiring the teaching of Composition, I thought it said Compassion - which might be something important to learn as well.</p>
<p>I’m sure this guy is selling something, I just can’t figure out what.</p>
<p>With the foreign language, he’s requiring three semesters – i.e., more than an AP. So any college that requires only AP or two semesters gets 0.</p>
<p>I’m sympathetic, because I think one year of a foreign language is useless. But there are hardly any colleges that require more. I’ll bet some of his A-list didn’t get full marks on that one.</p>
<p>I would much rather see colleges try to “round” students by requiring courses in areas which they would have been less likely to get in high school: philosophy, sociology, anthropology, political science, some sort of business or management, something in personal money management and investment (what the h- is an annuity, anyways?), personal nutrition, etc.</p>
<p>^ All those are required at the academies which are ranked as an A.</p>
<p>They’re required, yes and no. But they’re required within such restricted criteria with little freedom of choice as to how they are required, it might as well be a high school curriculum they’re pushing.</p>
<p>“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”</p>
<p>-Robert Heinlein.</p>
<p>Son of Opie, that just got a bookmark. Love it.</p>