<p>Basically, my situation is that when I graduate I will only have had three years of high school level science. </p>
<p>All three years are lab sciences (biology, adv. chemistry, adv. physics), but I couldn't afford to schedule in a science during my sophomore year due to a full schedule plus 2 AP independent studies. </p>
<p>I'm not planning on majoring in anything science related, but am looking into some very selective schools. Will this hurt me? Science is not a particular weakness of mine, and my math has not been affected (will have completed Calc AB and BC), but I'm worried that not having four years of science will be a problem. </p>
<p>As far as I know, three years of science is just fine at nearly every school. Some people do take four (or, like, eight...freaks...) but the recommended number is three. I think it you have a difficult schedule then three years of science is just fine.</p>
<p>Most schools doesn't ask for four years so, bottom line, you don't need it.</p>
<p>Thank you very much raelah. That was my general impression too, although some people (and admittedly people who have taken four, or like you say eight years of science) have told me otherwise. </p>
<p>A) why did you do both BC and AB? People usually take just one.
B) No, it shouldn't effect you AS LONG AS YOUR COURSE RIGOUR IS OTHERWISE STRONG, you can't just substitute like urban studies, pe, or something which doesn't sound like what you are doing....</p>
<p>I don't think taking just 3 years of science will hurt you at all -- especially since you're not looking to be a math/science major, and 2 of your 3 science classes were advanced level.</p>
<p>No, don't worry about it. Very, very certain about this. Essentially, you need to stand out somehow at this point, that's all. More science won't help necessarily, and less science won't hurt. I can compare + contrast many Harvard + Princeton acceptances + rejects.</p>