“One major for that difference is the Gen eds/distribution requirements covered in the first 2 year of US undergrad is usually covered at earlier educational stages like college prep HS or sometimes even middle school. It’s one reason why the Gymnasium Abitur diploma or A-Levels to an extent is regarded as the equivalent of not only a college prep HS diploma, but also the first 2 years of undergrad at a respectable/elite US college.”
American gen ed/distribution requirements tend to cover a greater breadth than A-levels do. English kids tend to take 4-5 A-Level subjects (I can’t remember the exact number) and they’re mostly ones related to their potential major/course.
"One major for that difference is the Gen eds/distribution requirements covered in the first 2 year of US undergrad is usually covered at earlier educational stages like college prep HS or sometimes even middle school. "
Seriously Cobrat, you need to hang out with European high school kids and spend time in European high schools (lycee, gymnasium, comprehensive, sixth form college, athenee, your pick). While their senior college-prep year is typically more rigorous than the average college prep year in the US, it is nowhere near covering the first two years of US undergrad gen ed. And I’d say that a “cc typical” student with 4-5 AP’s each of junior and senior year has at least as rigorous if not more rigorous schedule… for which they won’t get credit at top US colleges because that’s the default preparation.
English kids used to take 4 (sometimes 5) AS levels and 3 ALevels but there’s been a reform so not sure now, I think they’re supposed to stick to 3 both years. They’re supposed to have IGCSE’s in 10th grade, covering roughly CP or honors 10th grade English, Algebra 2, foreign language level 2 or 3, bio and chem, and social science, plus electives.
The British A-Levels and the German Gymnasium expect more specialization because the broader gen-ed coverage was done at earlier educational stages. I didn’t think I was limiting my comparison merely to the last year of high school because it’s not that simple.
Taking the ROC(Taiwan) and to an extent the Japanese education system as a similar model as both were modeled substantially on the German education system with some American influences, many courses which would be considered HS level (Bio/Chem/Physics with lab) or even early college level(i.e. Calculus*) here in the US usually needed to be completed by the end of middle school if one wanted to be eligible to sit the exam for college prep high schools.
And the college prep high schools there, like the British A-Levels or the German Gymnasium**, do expect greater specialization…there’s the humanities/social science stream and the Natural/Technical sciences stream
This is still a bit of a sore point with my mother as she was considered a remedial student because she only completed calculus as a HS sophomore at a private remedial HS in the ROC whereas all her older sisters completed it at the end of 8th grade, attended the more academically competitive public college-prep high schools, and a couple ended up at NTU and one ended up at an Ivy.
** They have Gymnasiums specializing in humanities, social sciences, and STEM.
@cobrat: things must have changed because European education systems aren’t like this at all now. No one takes Calculus in 10th grade, let alone in the 8th. Not all students take Calculus. In fact, students outside the science stream likely don’t take much math at all past Algebra2/geometry/basic statistics.
GCSE’s are like 10th grade honors classes. GCSE triple science is not more advanced than honors bio/chem/physics. A-level classes are more advanced, but students only take 3, so it’s more like taking 3 2-semester college sequences. Abitur science stream is not more advanced than several science Ap’s. The difference is that not many American high school seniors take those, whereas all students selected for the Abitur science stream do.
@cobrat: “The British A-Levels and the German Gymnasium expect more specialization because the broader gen-ed coverage was done at earlier educational stages.”
Sure. In the sense that American high schools cover broad gen eds as well. But English GCSE’s aren’t covering subjects at an American college level.
One major difference is the elementary and middle schools tend to cover gen-eds in more depth and have higher general academic expectations for all students before tracking starts at the end of middle school.
It’s one reason why most students from such educational systems who are placed on many vocational tracks* tend to have a higher-level of academic preparation than your average US middle school graduate.
I.e. A younger friend who was placed on a vocational-track STEM HS meant to prepare students aspiring to be commissioned officers in the former Soviet/Russian armed forces and later gained asylum in the US because he decided serving in the late Soviet/early post-Soviet Russian military forces wasn't for him.
Ended up attending and excelling as a STEM major at a top 50 US college…even to the point of taking some grad classes during his undergrad because his vocational HS education covered enough material so he tested out of many intro/intermediate level classes.
@cobrat: How does an example from the Russian educational system in grade school tell you anything about the English educational system in grade school?
Your examples all predate the democratization of upper-secondary education.
You’ve said this often on these boards, so please try to get your hands on some syllabi for France, Germany, the UK, Spain… you’ll see that what you’re talking about would have been true in the 60’s and up to the 80’s to a certain extent, but not anymore. PISA has forced big changes in the German education system and expectations have nothing in common with what they were 15 years ago; thinking comprehensives offer college-level “gen eds” is laughable, KS4 is what we’d call honors classes, not even AP; in France beside the Philosophy and Foreign Language exams which are very advanced I’d say the science stream is lower in content than an American who takes AP Physics/AP Bio/AP Chem/AP Calc AB despite strenuous rigor in writing (like proof-based basic calc). In addition, budget cuts due to the 2008 financial crisis also left traces, cutting class hours.
In any case, there are lower-cost colleges in Europe, for sure, and if what you want is sit in a lecture, take notes, read a book, take notes, take an exam, its academics will be excellent and expectations high. At some universities it’ll be purely theoretical, at others there’ll be more hands-on opportunities. Some universities will offer tutorials, some won’t. Some will offer a choice of classes, most won’t. Career services are likely to be deficient, underfunded, or inexistent. The pass rate is very low in some programs. Moving to Europe for “cheap” college can be a solution, but students need to go in with their eyes wide open.
US, UK and EU universities are no different in that they are chasing Chinese and Indian money. @MYOS1634 comments reflect the reality of most European educations, it is very stripped down compared to the US systems and the costs reflect that. Only a few like Oxbridge and LSE can charge the equivalent of US prices because they offer services close to their US counterparts, have an outstanding academic reputation or highly a desirable location. EU governments subsidize their universities a lot more and have a lot of huge lecture classes, many EU students live at home and work part time. It is not uncommon for an EU ‘child’ to be living at home until they are close to 30 because jobs are scarce and it takes longer to finish college.
Well, @TooOld4School, Oxbridge and LSE are quite cheap compared to full-pay at an American uni private/OOS public (though entrance in to any of those 3 is not guaranteed by test scores as they have enough demand to be holistic to a degree as well, though in those cases, you have to impress the faculty of a subject, not adcoms).
Other UK unis cost more than tuition-free continental ones but less than full-pay American privates/OOS publics but yes, career services and academic support and “perks” would not match that of a rich American private (no free writing center or subsidization for un-paid/ill-paid summer internships or thousands of dollars to form your own study-abroad experience and student groups have to compete for performance space because there aren’t enough available to put on plays, etc.). That’s why I compare all UK unis outside Oxbridge and LSE more to the top tier of American publics (though some rich American publics, like UMich and especially “special” schools/programs like Ross or UT-Austin’s Plan II or other top schools/departments/honors colleges offer the resources and perks of a rich American private).
@PurpleTitan , The tuition at Oxford for an undergrad studying Physics is about £30K, or about $37K. SDSMT OOS tuition is 14K. Georgia Tech OOS tuition is $30K. Princeton tuition is $47K.
So I would definitely not call Oxford a screaming bargain, but it is less than Princeton, and the price has dropped a lot in relative terms since the decline of the pound. If you are not full pay, that is a different story.
S heading to Oxford next year. He’s in the highest tuition degree program (Maths & Comp Sci). Between tuition (23kGBP), college fee (7k GBP) and room & board (5kGBP), at current rates, that cost is $45k. As a full fare payer, that feels like a deal to me versus the US alternatives.
The relative transparency of admissions in European and Canadian universities (academics based) make them attractive to the students that don’t want to play the holistic admissions game at American universities.
@Hazegrey@Foobar1… Where have you two been hiding, it was some hard sleding this weekend. @hazegrey save me looking, is that 3 years or 4 for that course? Even so if like me you don’t qualify for finaid it’s still a deal.
Three for the BA, you can stay for the fourth for the MMathsCompSci.
And agree 100% with @foobar1 on the process. As a veteran of many math competitions, he was very comfortable with the MAT/interview process versus the crap shoot of the “holistic” approach. Was proven right in the end as he was rejected at all the top tier US schools he applied to except for a courtesy WL at his mother’s Ivy.
I think this is one of the underlying reasons for the growth of honors colleges at the flagships. There are just too many academically qualified kids for the limited number of seats at the Ivy+ schools. The honors colleges are a good option for many academically excellent students.
Huge congrats to your son