Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think students overestimate the importance of being able to double major. If it's easy at the university, sure, do it. If it's more difficult, I don't think it has a negative impact on a student's future opportunities.

I could not disagree more. Double majoring is really popular these days. I have a kid double majoring in a humanities and a STEM, which is possible at a school with an open curriculum. She's going to have so many more options this way.

Who…cares? This has nothing to do with open curriculum or core. The reason it’s hard for Reed is their particular stringent requirements. 99% of other places allow you to double major pretty easily.

Right but you said you think students overestimate the important of a double major. I disagree. Besides if this student wants to double major they shouldn't go to a school that makes it hard/impossible. Which means Reed doesn't sound like a good choice for this student.

I didn't say that at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For physics, Reed represents a go-to school. For a tangible feature of its program, consider its nuclear reactor. However, this isn't intended as a direct comparison to Colorado College's physics program.

As a personal opinion, I'd choose CC for its generally more interesting curriculum, which includes a geosciences program, for example.

What does geosciences have to do with the discussion?

For those who understand the field, the potential overlap with the OP's stated interests may seem obvious. This is from the University of Illinois, for example: "We like to think of geology as the ‘liberal arts’ of the sciences. That’s because geology takes ideas from math, physics, chemistry, and biology and applies them to the Earth." Colorado College would allow such broad exploration, should this student want to maintain such an option.

I did geology and physics in college …and yeah no. Not to any significant extent does geology introduce physics or biology. There’s a bit of chemistry and very very elementary math- if you’re in a rigorous program you MIGHT see Fourier analysis. Geologists talk themselves up, but it is nowhere near the level of rigor as a chemistry or physics degree.

In terms of overlap with the biological sciences alone, you appear to have avoided courses in paleontology, paleobiology and geomicrobiology. In any case, no one had compared rigor prior to your post.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think students overestimate the importance of being able to double major. If it's easy at the university, sure, do it. If it's more difficult, I don't think it has a negative impact on a student's future opportunities.

I could not disagree more. Double majoring is really popular these days. I have a kid double majoring in a humanities and a STEM, which is possible at a school with an open curriculum. She's going to have so many more options this way.

Who…cares? This has nothing to do with open curriculum or core. The reason it’s hard for Reed is their particular stringent requirements. 99% of other places allow you to double major pretty easily.

Right but you said you think students overestimate the important of a double major. I disagree. Besides if this student wants to double major they shouldn't go to a school that makes it hard/impossible. Which means Reed doesn't sound like a good choice for this student.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think students overestimate the importance of being able to double major. If it's easy at the university, sure, do it. If it's more difficult, I don't think it has a negative impact on a student's future opportunities.

I could not disagree more. Double majoring is really popular these days. I have a kid double majoring in a humanities and a STEM, which is possible at a school with an open curriculum. She's going to have so many more options this way.

Who…cares? This has nothing to do with open curriculum or core. The reason it’s hard for Reed is their particular stringent requirements. 99% of other places allow you to double major pretty easily.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think students overestimate the importance of being able to double major. If it's easy at the university, sure, do it. If it's more difficult, I don't think it has a negative impact on a student's future opportunities.

I could not disagree more. Double majoring is really popular these days. I have a kid double majoring in a humanities and a STEM, which is possible at a school with an open curriculum. She's going to have so many more options this way.

At HWS, for example, completion of a minimum of a major and a minor is a requirement for graduation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For physics, Reed represents a go-to school. For a tangible feature of its program, consider its nuclear reactor. However, this isn't intended as a direct comparison to Colorado College's physics program.

As a personal opinion, I'd choose CC for its generally more interesting curriculum, which includes a geosciences program, for example.

What does geosciences have to do with the discussion?

For those who understand the field, the potential overlap with the OP's stated interests may seem obvious. This is from the University of Illinois, for example: "We like to think of geology as the ‘liberal arts’ of the sciences. That’s because geology takes ideas from math, physics, chemistry, and biology and applies them to the Earth." Colorado College would allow such broad exploration, should this student want to maintain such an option.

I did geology and physics in college …and yeah no. Not to any significant extent does geology introduce physics or biology. There’s a bit of chemistry and very very elementary math- if you’re in a rigorous program you MIGHT see Fourier analysis. Geologists talk themselves up, but it is nowhere near the level of rigor as a chemistry or physics degree.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For physics, Reed represents a go-to school. For a tangible feature of its program, consider its nuclear reactor. However, this isn't intended as a direct comparison to Colorado College's physics program.

As a personal opinion, I'd choose CC for its generally more interesting curriculum, which includes a geosciences program, for example.

What does geosciences have to do with the discussion?

For those who understand the field, the potential overlap with the OP's stated interests may seem obvious. This is from the University of Illinois, for example: "We like to think of geology as the ‘liberal arts’ of the sciences. That’s because geology takes ideas from math, physics, chemistry, and biology and applies them to the Earth." Colorado College would allow such broad exploration, should this student want to maintain such an option.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think students overestimate the importance of being able to double major. If it's easy at the university, sure, do it. If it's more difficult, I don't think it has a negative impact on a student's future opportunities.

I could not disagree more. Double majoring is really popular these days. I have a kid double majoring in a humanities and a STEM, which is possible at a school with an open curriculum. She's going to have so many more options this way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think students overestimate the importance of being able to double major. If it's easy at the university, sure, do it. If it's more difficult, I don't think it has a negative impact on a student's future opportunities.

I could not disagree more. Double majoring is really popular these days. I have a kid double majoring in a humanities and a STEM, which is possible at a school with an open curriculum. She's going to have so many more options this way.

Anonymous wrote:I think students overestimate the importance of being able to double major. If it's easy at the university, sure, do it. If it's more difficult, I don't think it has a negative impact on a student's future opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For physics, Reed represents a go-to school. For a tangible feature of its program, consider its nuclear reactor. However, this isn't intended as a direct comparison to Colorado College's physics program.

As a personal opinion, I'd choose CC for its generally more interesting curriculum, which includes a geosciences program, for example.

What does geosciences have to do with the discussion?

Anonymous wrote:How does she feel about CC's block schedule? That seems like something she'd either love or hate. Reed's jr year comps are also unique -- are they a draw or a negative?

This isn't a decision that should be made based on prestige.

Anonymous wrote:For physics, Reed represents a go-to school. For a tangible feature of its program, consider its nuclear reactor. However, this isn't intended as a direct comparison to Colorado College's physics program.

As a personal opinion, I'd choose CC for its generally more interesting curriculum, which includes a geosciences program, for example.