Not so but probably not worth continuing.
@lostaccount, let’s not speak in generalities. What majors fit your description?
I am familiar with CS, where the bulk of “foundational courses” that typically transfer over from a CC either really are gen ed and don’t matter for success in CS or are built upon and do matter but are child’s play compared to advanced CS classes. In any case, the CS major GPA and grades in specific courses tells me what I need to know. Someone with a 3.8 GPA in CS classes and A’s in data strictures, algorithms, and OS isn’t going to have gaps in their foundational CS knowledge.
Musing about this this morning. Math and CS would definitely require a strong foundation. They almost totally build upon themselves which is why (IMO) a student who struggles in Alg 1 shouldn’t be pushed on to Geometry and Alg 2 even though that happens all the time. Chem and Physics mostly build upon themselves too, more Physics than Chem, but that’s probably due to the math involved. Still, with each of these there are a few topics that could be missed and one could still do well elsewhere in the subject. I could see some getting by in Bio with gaps as long as they had the general basics that are covered in pretty much any course.
That said, it seems common that at “usual” transfer schools, the deeper material is often covered in later courses (as with that DE Prof), so students don’t really miss out. It’s just a different focus on whether that material is needed early in a major’s student life or later. Then too, when in earlier classes, ALL students taking that course get the material. When in later courses only those taking the higher level courses get it. That’s one of the big reasons I only recommend higher level schools to students who really enjoy academics and have the ability to do it.
Want to be a doctor? Any school will work if you do well. If you don’t care for the deeper level classes, stick with an easier school. If you love academics and study, the easier schools don’t have as much to offer.
I KNOW there are posters on here who claim that ALL pre-med courses are the same at any school. IME with oodles of students, that’s just not true. But it’s also not true that one needs the higher level schools (or their courses) to get accepted into med school. A top student can get bored at a lower level school (my middle son’s peer had this happen, but he’s still going to med school). A good, but not “loving it” student can get needlessly overwhelmed at a school where it’s too deep.
Select the school to fit the student. It’s not one size fits all. The CC route works well for many students, but not many transfer to super top schools for obvious reasons. (Some do - there are probably some who could self study and still do well as they have that much mental ability and initiative. Most don’t. Plus CA may be a totally different creature with their levels covered in CC. Without seeing them or students who take those classes, I have no idea.)
I’ve known of thick, dense textbooks for community college calculus, chemistry and physics classes. I’ve also known of very challenging works assigned in CC humanities honors classes.
Size of the textbook has absolutely no bearing on the depth of the class.
^ Huh? If the problems in the textbook are complex and broad, as opposed to to narrow and simple, how could this have not just no bearing, but “absolutely no bearing,” on the depth of the class.
Because not all problems are done. Because some chapters are skipped. Because one textbook may cover 2 semesters at one university and 3 at another one - so that, say, Physics 2 only covered 2/3 of what Physics 2 covered elsewhere.
My objection was to “no bearing.” I’ll stay with my position that the nature/complexity of a textbook has at least some bearing on the difficulty of a class.
Regarding the honors humanities classes I referenced, they are not skipping chapters in Ulysses.
No bearing? Because in some classes a textbook might be required, but the student never uses it. At another school the same textbook might be required and they use it a lot. Those are the two extremes, but there’s also a bit of middle ground.
Even in the high school where I work, how much a textbook is used depends upon the teacher and what they choose to use from it.
There have been classes my middle son has had where the prof came in telling students that a lot of what they are going to learn is too new for textbooks. Does that make it a bad class?
No bearing - pro or con.
@nasa2014 “they say it would a big jump from a Communtiy college chemistry to college chemistry.”
I think that community college chemistry is not very different from college chemistry. The issue is that you are not apply to a random college; you are applying to Cornell. Many posters will attempt to tell you that Ivies use the same books and cover the same material, and that is a true statement. However, in many cases they will cover more material faster and in more detail than an average school. Also, the labs, assignments and projects may be much more extensive.
I don’t think you understand that they are doing this for your benefit. They do not want you to be blindsided because you do not have the same base to work from as the other students. However, while they are not granting you credit initially, if you are completely ready for the higher level material, you can discuss it with your faculty advisor or test out of the lower level. That does happen. You can work through that with your faculty advisor.
For example, D had already taken MV calc, as a review. After a week of classes she told her FA that she was bored stiff and already knew the things they were teaching. The FA spent an hour quizzing her about MV calc. He became comfortable that she did understand the material, and then moved her up to the next higher Calculus course. When she completed the next higher course with a satisfactory grade, she also received retroactive credit for MV calc.
^MV calc? FA?
I think MV stands for…Multivariable Calculus. I don’t know what FA stands for.
I think the A stands for advisor.
Freshman advisor?