<p>Course of Study: how do the top boarding schools compare in flexibility when students design their course of study?</p>
<p>Looking through a good number of catalogs/course guides, academics appear to comprise basic requirements (Math, English, History, Science); further requirements (Language, Arts/Music, Ethics/Religion/Health); and, if all this leaves space, some electives.</p>
<p>But within these subject groups, there is substantial disparity: some schools require up to 3 years of Math (or up to a certain grade), others, reaching an absolute standard (Precalculus). English and History likewise range from specific grade-assigned courses to choices that even include interdisciplinary humanities courses. Languages vary from strict year-requirements to more flexibility and even multiple courses at the same time. Art may include studio, performing art and/or music; with or without credit for solo instrument/orchestra performance.</p>
<p>Which school(s) do you find the most flexible? Which do you find the most rigid when it comes to tailoring an individual course of study for the child? (By flexible, think only a handful of pre-determined (whether by grade year, specific course, sequence, or any combination) of courses; by rigid, a large number of required courses, many in a specific sequence. Freedom of choice is maximized in the former case, while school input in the latter.)</p>
<p>Please share your opinion based on specific experience at a school you are familiar with.</p>
<p>I have found that the Middlesex School is the most flexible. 30% of students are taking more than 5 academic classes. Middlesex requires students to take some classes they ordinarily wouldn’t take, (Art History, Drama, etc) and they seem to allow for a lot of freedom in their academic schedule. Also, in their extracurriculars they seem to allow for a lot of freedom. A student can act in a play in the same term they play an interscholastic sport. Interscholastic sports are required. </p>
<p>As for the most rigid, I would have to go with Deerfield. They only allow 5 academic classes per term, and they seem pretty strict about this. You have to loose either Science or History Freshman or Sophomore to take a “Humanities” class. If you want to take more than language, it seems that you would have to sacrifice another academic class. (Although I am not sure about this, can someone verify…?) They do not seem to create “dabblers.”</p>
<p>p43531, could this wait until after March 10th? This sort of comparison isn’t meaningful as a general exercise. Some parents have students at different boarding schools, but what’s flexible for one parent may seem rigid to another.</p>
<p>These schools are all college prep schools. I believe that most graduates will be well prepared for college study, whether the program of studies is flexible or rigid. There are many different ways to peel an orange. I would not assume that students are encouraged to adhere to the bare minimum in required academic courses. </p>
<p>Most schools list courses which require prerequisites, but many add, “or with departmental permission,” or words to that effect. Some schools have a wide range of course offerings, and are accustomed to adapting to meet the needs of students who arrive at school with advanced preparation in certain subjects. </p>
<p>It all depends upon the student and the school.</p>
<p>A/E offer a wide range of courses. If they are rigid about their requirements, how would the students benefit from such offerings? I’m assuming they are flexible. Any one?</p>
<p>At Exeter, students choose from all of those electives to fulfill curricular requirements. So instead of every prep taking a preset history sequence, they might take religion in the fall, studio art in the winter and history in the spring. The requirements are broad enough that they have plenty of options. There are certain sequences that are required, like the American History sequence. Other are more general, amounting to pick three of the following 12 courses. Still others are very restrictive, like computer science where there are only two choices - one for kids with more of an interest in programming and another for kids without. In this sense, it’s a lot like college general education requirements.</p>
<p>Perhaps I was not clear in lining this up: if School1 requires of students entering Grades 9/10/11 respectively to take 9/7/4 in Math; 10/8/5 in English; and 6/5/3 in History, then that school seems (to me) more rigid than School2 that requires up to Precalculus (any time, perhaps met in first year at BS), 10/7/4 in English, and 9/6/3 in History (let alone, if simply “4/3/2 years of Math” etc. are stipulated, then that is even more restrictive than School1).</p>
<p>For two reasons, (1) math achievement is often unrelated to grade year, and (2) the other basic subjects phase out at a higher pace at School2 (later-year entrants have more space for electives, assuming they already fulfilled their Eng/His requirements in prior years). Again, my opinion only, but when I assess flexibility vs rigidity, this does matter in how much a student can take advantage of a smorgasbord of departmental offerings (think more college subjects like Econ, Psych, advanced Music or advanced seminars that the BS offers). If most of the space in the course of study is used up by pre-determined requirements, what is the real draw of “hundreds” of courses?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Precisely my point. If able and motivated students are offered the opportunity to learn academic subjects at the above two schools, the overall curriculum at School1 will
be more closely defined by the school’s belief in what constitutes college prep; at School2 it is somewhat more left to the student to decide. No value judgment intended about either, merely an obvious observation where two students each may prefer a different school’s philosophy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Thanks for the link. Interesting to see two Sample student “sample paths” (as CA calls them). Sacrifice? I would disagree, and say that for some it may be a sacrifice to learn an extra year of Math, for others an extra year of French. Which is why for some students flexibility of curriculum is a must. For others, it means little.</p>
<p>So beyond the general requirements of each school you are familiar with, how much flexibility is left for the student to choose?</p>
<p>Also, an “elective” in college seems something different than an “elective” in BS, since an “English elective” (see CA link above) implies that the student must take a year-long combination of classes in the English department. However, in college, the student may fill the space in their course of study with whatever interest them (within overall institution regulations given the distribution requirements, core classes etc.)</p>
<p>I don’t think so. They would probably encourage you to either start a new language and or take the literature based electives. A good number of kids at the top schools come in with a few languages under their belts. It probably depends on the school and the depth of their curriculum.</p>
<p>That (to me) would send a clear sign of rigidity. Unless the student, who is fluent in “French and German”, or “Mandarin and Russian”, wanted to study a language (same ones or begin new), what exactly is the pedagogical intent in a firm language requirement (at high school level, which is not the most stringent) for a bi/trilingual student?</p>
<p>Why would Math or Science top out (req’s met at, say, Precalculus) at a certain point, but not a language? What if said student really wanted to take advanced Bio courses as extra courses he could do instead of Spanish 1? Or focus on his music by taking AP Music Theory? Or do 3 sports, etc, etc?</p>
<p>I am using “languages” here merely as an example. Unless there is overriding reason (all-round strong fundamental familiarity with math, English/literature, sciences, a language, and arts), why have a requirement (any subject) that simply fills up the curriculum? (I hope that most top BS’s are more accommodating than our example suggests above).</p>
<p>Boarding schools are flexible, but don’t forget that they don’t determine university and college admissions standards. Skipping some required courses could have consequences. This links to the California State University system’s website for applicants: [CSUMentor</a> - Plan for College - High School Students - High School Subject Requirements](<a href=“Cal State Apply | CSU”>Freshman: Admission Requirements | CSU). Note that they require two years of a language other than English. This requirement may be waived–enquire at the specific campus. Well, if you discover in senior year that your favorite campus does not waive the requirement, you’re out of luck. </p>
<p>The Cal State system also recommends 4 years of English, and 4 years of math. 1 year of visual or performing arts (even if you’re tone-deaf, colorblind, and have stage-fright, I presume.)</p>
<p>The University of South Carolina requires 4 years of English, 4 years of math, 3 years of lab science, 2 years of foreign language study (no mention of waivers), and college-prep electives (very interesting):</p>
<p>In short, the “overriding reason” for the standard requirements is that it doesn’t make it impossible for a student to apply to certain colleges. </p>
<p>I have a friend whose daughter was threatened with expulsion from the University of South Carolina, as she had two lab courses, not three. It ended well–her daughter kept her grades up, and the threat went away. It was not a relaxing few months for the family. Yes, there is the logical question, which the mother asked, “You admitted her. You had her transcript. Can’t you count to two?” (Her daughter graduated from our local public high school, not boarding school.)</p>
<p>Are there exceptions made for an outstanding concert pianist, a varsity football player, an applicant fluent in four languages, or a physics olympiad winner? Absolutely. Even for the well-rounded kid with the fluff ECs and for-fitness-only sports.</p>
<p>In other words, since most strong candidates will do well on the SATs, many will also have high AP scores, the individuality could be better expressed by some flexibility in student’s course choices. Must “college prep” mean molding you into a commodity product, instead of letting you soar, whatever your natural gifts may be (so long as you fulfill basic requirements)? I suspect it’s somewhere in the middle, but school flexibility can mean a lot.</p>
<p>For purposes of argument, could it be possible that smart kids could learn all math they need to know in 9 terms? 7? Perhaps even 5 or 6? How about English? If they wanted more exposure to world literature, should they be disallowed to take extra courses? If their interest is physical sciences, why should they sacrifice their sleep, sports, or orchestra schedules just to fulfill a language or English requirement in the later years?</p>
<p>What, are we afraid that any top achiever above will be discriminated against by fine colleges because he took 6 (not 4) math, but only 3 (not 4) English classes, and barely passed Spanish 3? Ridiculous. Is that “4 years of math”, culminating in calculus or beyond actually ever utilized by most college graduates? Are all fine college grads fluent in at least 2 languages? (One is required in high school, one in college)?</p>
<p>Hundreds of kids each year could not pass the QRR (former Quantitative Reasoning Requirement) at Harvard College (where the above quote originates), yet we are to assume that they all had 4 years’ rigorous math training. Perhaps on paper. Many of them would have been better reading more poetry, playing their harp more often, organizing more social events or spending more time leaping across the field. By the way, I am not picking on any particular college, simply using Harvard as an example that appearances and requirements for the sake of requirements may make less than perfect sense, and can be exposed very quickly.</p>
<p>And for the kids, I am not talking slackers here filling their BS schedule with cooking classes or watching cartoons for a course grade. Instead, recognizing that each student may have different talents, cultivating those can be helpful instead of a mainstream approach just to fulfill (misperceived) college requirements. So many kids would be better off with rock-solid basic math/stats skills instead of having to feign wizardry in calculus while furiously typing away on the TI-84! And instead of 4 years’ language, why not pass an internationally recognized language exam (if you can do it at age 8, why would we penalize you?)</p>
<p>But that’s just me. I guess some who protest incessantly about school rankings, yield% rates and big-name schools will blindly chase “course credits” to get their kids into those very schools. Why not think first?</p>
<p>p43531, it seems you have a particular transcript in mind for yourself (or your child.) If you’re the next Yo-Yo Ma or Albert Einstein, feel free to disregard colleges’ stated entry requirements. For anyone else, it can be a high-risk endeavor.</p>
<p>Some students are gifted mathematicians, some prodigy musicians, others have the gift for learning languages easily. It was not a problem to take extra advanced courses in the subjects I was passionate about @ my current school. I don’t see why BS would object to a student who’s willing.</p>