<p>Hey guys, it’s that time again, to select classes for the upcoming school year, my final year of HS woot woot! Anywho, I’m an IB certificate candidate, and I was just wondering which one I should take–AP Euro or IB History of the Americas. Would it look better on my college transcript, and is it generally better if I take IB HOA? Also, how does the workload differentiate/separate these 2 courses?</p>
<p>I’m an IB diploma candidate so I’m in IB HOA HL. I think that they’re pretty much two different classes. If you have any intention of taking some sort of SAT II History, do NOT take IB HOA. IB is an inch wide and a mile deep while AP seems to be more of a mile wide and an inch deep, thus you’re far more prepared for standardized history tests with AP history. </p>
<p>As far as which looks better on college, I would say they’re probably about equal and it really won’t push your admissions decision one way or the other. I will put in my very biased opinion though - I think IB history is more challenging as it is more writing-based and extremley, extremley heavy on the analysis/evaluation of rather specific events. I know a lot of people will disagree with that, but whatever. That’s what I think.</p>
<p>And I think the workload really depends on the teacher. There’s a lot of work in my history class, but I’ve heard from friends in AP history that there’s also a lot of reading in that class. It really depends on the teacher.</p>
<p>anyone else?</p>
<p>common guys, anyone else? please</p>
<p>please guys, i would really appreciate some insight</p>
<p>I never took AP Euro, but I did take AP US History and IB History of the Americas (A little repetitive: USA is the Americas, jk).</p>
<p>I agree with ava78’s post that AP emphasizes breadth and IB prefers depth. I learned only 7 topics in the History of the Americas, such as Mexican revolution, Spanish-American War, etc, but too many in AP.</p>
<p>Looking back, I prefer the IB style. AP teaches the student how to spit out facts, but IB teaches the thinking, analytical, research, and communication skills. That’s not to say that AP does not, but not on the same level as IB. I think it’s more important to learn how to analyze history and historiography than knowing who won more votes in the 1888 election (Cleveland, though he lost the presidency).</p>
<p>IB is also a lot less demanding. Because IB covers less factual material, I did not have to spend hours every week on busywork, trying to remember every fact from my history book. If your goal is time management and take no other advanced classes, AP Euro could be a way to acquire those skills, especially doing something that is not fun, which everyone faces many times in life.</p>
<p>However, my IB History teachers were boring, while the AP one was fun and humorous.</p>
<p>I think they would both look about the same. Just do well in the class :P</p>
<p>And on the workload, ask some other people who are in those classes what things are like. And I would suggest you figure out which teacher is better @ teaching // more interesting and decide which class to take based on which you would enjoy more.</p>
<p>The first year of IB HoA HL, which I’m assuming is the year you learn for SL, was decent but not too interesting. The second year, which is called 20th Century World History and is based upon “Diplomacy” by Henry Kissinger is the most interesting class I’ve ever taken.</p>
<p>I’m partial to European History anyway, so I’d go for the AP.</p>