Gen-ed requirements: part of a well-rounded liberal arts education or high school 2.0?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way the elite schools do it is best: they have requirements for classes across disciplines, but they can be taken anytime in the 4 yrs, they are typically seminar style that dive deep into an area, many times there are upper level courses that count toward it. They are much harder than AP across the board, as are 90% of courses at top schools, which is why no AP credit is given for most APs at these schools (AP or testing is used for placing into higher levels of calculus and sometimes sciences and foreign language).
The students do not have to complete them before starting courses toward their major(s) or concentration. Ivies, Hopkins, stanford, top SLACs, William and Mary, Wake, Duke, WashU and dozens more do it this way.
Only the large publics have it such that the first 2 yrs are predominantly gen-ed and there is high overlap with AP.

Not the case with my oldest at UMD. 1 to 2 gen ed classes a semester.

They're still rather rudimentary courses, even if you wait 4 years to complete them.

Can you tedious1 snobs stop dumping on intro and survey classes at schools you've never attended?

Stop acting like every class at a pricy school is made up of intensely meaningful dialogues with the genius professor. We know you think you sprang fully formed from the brow of Zeus...

+1

[Anonymous]

My DC likes it personally because he has broad interests academically. But many of his friends hate it.

[Anonymous]

Colleges shouldn't be admitting students who can't write. But if they do that should just be additional time there to catch up, not credit towards the degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Colleges shouldn't be admitting students who can't write. But if they do that should just be additional time there to catch up, not credit towards the degree.

Then the majority of public school students won’t be going to college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not talking about elite institutions like Yale or Columbia where the breadth requirements are part of a curated humanistic curriculum.

But it seems at say, UMCP or Penn State, a lot of time is spent on these requirements, more than a third of the degree in the arts and sciences. I can see the merit, but in practice it seems to lean to a lot of undisciplined and unfocused learning. In a lot of ways it's like high school again - take your English, take your math, take your foreign language, take your gym etc. In fact the gen-ed requirements are often more extensive than the major to which students are only devoting about 30% of the degree to.

Maybe this is why in a lot of countries the bachelor's degree is 3 years because gen-ed is mainly an American thing.

I have one on the gen ed model and one that will be on the SLAC model as to course diversification. The first has generally liked the gen ed classes and used them to take things of interest outside her major (which is pre-professional and very prescriptive), but I think the value there is limited. Plus at larger schools like Maryland or Penn State, getting into a good gen ed course can be a bit of a crap shoot. Much prefer the SLAC model where breadth of experience is more intentional and the course selection process doesn't resemble the Hunger Games.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible to graduate in 3 years if you accumulate enough AP credits (at the schools that accept them)?

Yes. I know a ton of kids who have done it at UVA.

The T10s/Ivies and a lot of privates do not accept any AP credits. They are not equivalent to a college course in any manner.

How many is a ton?

About a half dozen average Americans these days.

Well played.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way the elite schools do it is best: they have requirements for classes across disciplines, but they can be taken anytime in the 4 yrs, they are typically seminar style that dive deep into an area, many times there are upper level courses that count toward it. They are much harder than AP across the board, as are 90% of courses at top schools, which is why no AP credit is given for most APs at these schools (AP or testing is used for placing into higher levels of calculus and sometimes sciences and foreign language).
The students do not have to complete them before starting courses toward their major(s) or concentration. Ivies, Hopkins, stanford, top SLACs, William and Mary, Wake, Duke, WashU and dozens more do it this way.
Only the large publics have it such that the first 2 yrs are predominantly gen-ed and there is high overlap with AP.

Not the case with my oldest at UMD. 1 to 2 gen ed classes a semester.

They're still rather rudimentary courses, even if you wait 4 years to complete them.

Can you tedious1 snobs stop dumping on intro and survey classes at schools you've never attended?

Stop acting like every class at a pricy school is made up of intensely meaningful dialogues with the genius professor. We know you think you sprang fully formed from the brow of Zeus...

+100
It’s comical, isn’t it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For state public flagship universities that require significant in state enrollment ie UNC, UT Austin, to some extent UVA and VAtech, the in state stats are lower than out of state. In order to have a large instate enrollment lower stats are getting accepted and enrolled compared to out state students who are much higher in quality. For these out of state students the classes might be too easy for form.

This is why the southern public schools are offering so much merit to out of state to bring in smart kids and entice them with honors college.

If you go to in state, it’s likely to be high school 2.0

OMG. This again? Get a grip and try posting about things you actually know about. This clearly is not one of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not talking about elite institutions like Yale or Columbia where the breadth requirements are part of a curated humanistic curriculum.

But it seems at say, UMCP or Penn State, a lot of time is spent on these requirements, more than a third of the degree in the arts and sciences. I can see the merit, but in practice it seems to lean to a lot of undisciplined and unfocused learning. In a lot of ways it's like high school again - take your English, take your math, take your foreign language, take your gym etc. In fact the gen-ed requirements are often more extensive than the major to which students are only devoting about 30% of the degree to.

Maybe this is why in a lot of countries the bachelor's degree is 3 years because gen-ed is mainly an American thing.

I have one on the gen ed model and one that will be on the SLAC model as to course diversification. The first has generally liked the gen ed classes and used them to take things of interest outside her major (which is pre-professional and very prescriptive), but I think the value there is limited. Plus at larger schools like Maryland or Penn State, getting into a good gen ed course can be a bit of a crap shoot. Much prefer the SLAC model where breadth of experience is more intentional and the course selection process doesn't resemble the Hunger Games.

I have two at large state schools who have never experienced this “Hunger Games” fantasy of course selection you love to propagate in numerous threads. They have a wide breadth of gen ed courses to choose from and have had no issues getting the classes they prefer. And of course, the variety of offerings at larger schools could never be matched at a SLAC.

[Anonymous]

While GE requirements are rhetorically presented as intellectual exploration and being well-rounded, in practice they're really about dealing with the unevenness of secondary education in the US. Big state flagships get students of quite varying levels of preparation and the functional purpose in reality is to establish some sort of common baseline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way the elite schools do it is best: they have requirements for classes across disciplines, but they can be taken anytime in the 4 yrs, they are typically seminar style that dive deep into an area, many times there are upper level courses that count toward it. They are much harder than AP across the board, as are 90% of courses at top schools, which is why no AP credit is given for most APs at these schools (AP or testing is used for placing into higher levels of calculus and sometimes sciences and foreign language).
The students do not have to complete them before starting courses toward their major(s) or concentration. Ivies, Hopkins, stanford, top SLACs, William and Mary, Wake, Duke, WashU and dozens more do it this way.
Only the large publics have it such that the first 2 yrs are predominantly gen-ed and there is high overlap with AP.

What? The "large publics" I'm familiar with have exactly what you just described. At Virginia Tech, for example, students have all four years to complete their gen ed requirements. They take them alongside courses for their major. Maybe you should research a bit more before making sweeping statements?

I think that’s the norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way the elite schools do it is best: they have requirements for classes across disciplines, but they can be taken anytime in the 4 yrs, they are typically seminar style that dive deep into an area, many times there are upper level courses that count toward it. They are much harder than AP across the board, as are 90% of courses at top schools, which is why no AP credit is given for most APs at these schools (AP or testing is used for placing into higher levels of calculus and sometimes sciences and foreign language).
The students do not have to complete them before starting courses toward their major(s) or concentration. Ivies, Hopkins, stanford, top SLACs, William and Mary, Wake, Duke, WashU and dozens more do it this way.
Only the large publics have it such that the first 2 yrs are predominantly gen-ed and there is high overlap with AP.

Not the case with my oldest at UMD. 1 to 2 gen ed classes a semester.

They're still rather rudimentary courses, even if you wait 4 years to complete them.

How could you possibly know that?

[Anonymous]

I thought I knew what I wanted to do when I went to college. It wasn’t until I took a gen ed course in a completely different discipline that I realized what I really wanted to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way the elite schools do it is best: they have requirements for classes across disciplines, but they can be taken anytime in the 4 yrs, they are typically seminar style that dive deep into an area, many times there are upper level courses that count toward it. They are much harder than AP across the board, as are 90% of courses at top schools, which is why no AP credit is given for most APs at these schools (AP or testing is used for placing into higher levels of calculus and sometimes sciences and foreign language).
The students do not have to complete them before starting courses toward their major(s) or concentration. Ivies, Hopkins, stanford, top SLACs, William and Mary, Wake, Duke, WashU and dozens more do it this way.
Only the large publics have it such that the first 2 yrs are predominantly gen-ed and there is high overlap with AP.

What? The "large publics" I'm familiar with have exactly what you just described. At Virginia Tech, for example, students have all four years to complete their gen ed requirements. They take them alongside courses for their major. Maybe you should research a bit more before making sweeping statements?

+1

I also think students are generally taking mostly gen core curriculum courses bc they are still not yet fully committed to a major or trying to dual major.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way the elite schools do it is best: they have requirements for classes across disciplines, but they can be taken anytime in the 4 yrs, they are typically seminar style that dive deep into an area, many times there are upper level courses that count toward it. They are much harder than AP across the board, as are 90% of courses at top schools, which is why no AP credit is given for most APs at these schools (AP or testing is used for placing into higher levels of calculus and sometimes sciences and foreign language).
The students do not have to complete them before starting courses toward their major(s) or concentration. Ivies, Hopkins, stanford, top SLACs, William and Mary, Wake, Duke, WashU and dozens more do it this way.
Only the large publics have it such that the first 2 yrs are predominantly gen-ed and there is high overlap with AP.

What? The "large publics" I'm familiar with have exactly what you just described. At Virginia Tech, for example, students have all four years to complete their gen ed requirements. They take them alongside courses for their major. Maybe you should research a bit more before making sweeping statements?

Yes, this