<p>
</p>
<p>For the record, I have a Masters degree in Art History from one of the top programs in the country, so yes, I do know of what I speak.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Upper division Art H courses do build on Art H 101 where one ideally learns basic outline of the discipline, basic techniques of how to approach a piece of work from various historical perspectives, the vocabulary etc. One then applies this knowledge, which is qualitative not quantitative, to various periods of art, artists, pieces etc. As one learns more, the complexity and the quality of one’s analysis increases. A senior student should write a more thoughtful and nuanced paper than a sophomore, so it is vertical in that sense. However, a sophomore and a senior can both take the same course. </p>
<p>Thinking through Biology though, it’s really not all that vertical either. Other than the chem/orgo/biochem (biochem in my college was a grad course and UG were not required to take although I did as a Jr) and the calculus before physics route, it really was/is not a vertical major. I think the physical sciences/math/engineering is where the ladder is steep, so to speak. And that, I think, is just the nature of those disciplines. I can probably walk any educated person through an art history argument, biological phenomena, or a medical condition, but there is no way anyone is going to walk me through a complex theoretical mathematical problem (such as the ones my soph DS is doing in Real Analysis) with an iota of understanding on my part. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Heck, I got way more B’s in my Hum/Soc Sci courses than I did in my STEM classes. I just figured it was because I was better at STEM than I was at writing papers. BTW, I think DS’s freshman physics (for majors) prof basically gave out mostly A’s. So each decide how to ‘curve.’</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Without meaning to sound obnoxious, truthfully I am not sure why people find Gen Bio so difficult. There are no complex theories for people to understand, no nuanced analysis that a student has to perform. It’s read the book, learn the material. Yes, lots of information, but actually lot less than you will learn in a first year med school anatomy class. And if you want to ‘just’ major in Biology, it’s stuff you should find interesting and want to learn.</p>
<p>And no, med schools cannot do the weeding. My med school class was capped at 104 students as that was the number of pathology slide sets the school possessed. You were assigned a set, expected to guard it with your life, and there were no extras.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone would want to go through the med school app process, pay a years tuition and then find out that you really are not fit for the field :D</p>
)</p>
) about a professor who has found that teaching hard sciences through a collaborative method works really well. I think it was on Science Friday… His method was that once some of the students have grasped a concept, he has them work with those who don’t get it yet to explain it. I don’t remember for sure, but I think he alternated his classes between some lecture, and some of these explaining sessions (in the same hour). He has done formal studies of both methods, and found that this method produces a much higher rate of understanding across the class. He says that it is easier for someone who just learned a concept to explain it because they are more likely to realize what is confusing or difficult for someone trying to figure it out (because the student explaining just went through that). Wish I could find the link. But what it made me realize is that just because we have always taught science this way (big lecture format and independent reading) does NOT mean it is the best way to do it.</p>