Into Cornell... What Next?

lianri
Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:47:06 +0000

Well, the only thing a higher level signifies is that the course is harder. If you’re up for the hard work, why not?

I know what you mean- it’s generally good to give yourself less work as you’re adjusting to college. Taking a 300 level as a freshman is definitely not common (though taking a 200 level is). I was just confused when you said that taking a 200 or 300 level as a freshman is a big mistake and that everyone who does it always regrets it. I did it and enjoyed the courses I took, as did others I know. That doesn’t mean we’re better at handling work than others (I don’t want to come off as arrogant)- that’s not true. TBH I’ve noticed very little difference in difficulty between 100 and 200 levels (though 300 levels get noticeably more difficult)

What distinguishes higher levels from lower ones is not just difficulty, but also specificity. A 100 level history class, for example, would be “Western Civilization,” while a 300 level history class would be like “History of the City of Florence, 1200-1500” (I think that’s an actual class). In deciding what courses to take, I’d go more by: what level of specificity do you want?, instead of: how hard do I want to work?