@NASA2014 : Uhmm…it is an AP exam. They cannot design it so that it matches EVERY school’s and every professor’s rendition of the analogous course. That is impossible. I suspect it is designed versus more standard level analogs. Some of the STEM AP exams have been “improved” to enhance conceptual understanding but may still lack content in comparison to a) elite privates and b) less selective, but still competitive schools undergoing curricular reform.
I’ll give examples of elite privates/publics: WUSTL’s general chemistry 1 has “true” quantum concepts in it, as in students learning particle in the box model and things of that nature. The AP exam stresses NO quantum concepts, even those at the level covered in most gen. chem 1 renditions at more/most selective schools. In fact, AP just recently added “some” structural chemistry concepts (basic things like resonance and drawing a lewis structure), but tends to de-emphasize certain more conceptual things related to structure in favor of mathematics like gas laws, titrations/equilibria, and basic level thermodynamics (which mimics general chemistry 2 at most universities and not general chemistry 1. ), with almost all related questions in the AP free response being wordy (they try to couch in a lab/experimental context, so students learn to read), yet still, each sub-prompt ends up usually being SINGLE-concept. Most professors will have many problems that are multi-concept in a single prompt or sub-prompt, where even if they are kind of "plug and chug"ish, students may have to link several equations/math related processes from seemingly unrelated concepts to solve.
Places like Emory, Michigan, and many LACs (highly selective or not) have moved towards integrating even more structural concepts than most schools in their general chemistry sequences and in fact the first two have integrated a lot of real organic chemistry (as in reactivity and the standard levels of spacial learning emphasized in a sophomore level organic course, but also connected back to some gen. chem concepts. I think both even teach things like mass spec. and emphasize some more physics oriented concepts. They both use an atom’s first approach + some more, and Michigan has been doing it far longer, since 1997. Emory started 2-3 years ago and just fully implemented the integration of organic chemistry this past cycle). In these cases, since these scenarios/schools have sequences that deviate significantly in emphasis, focus, and content, AP may have limits for giving students content exposure, but may still afford an exposure and work ethic advantage provided that the student doesn’t “retake” the course EXPECTING it to be a complete repeat or a cruisefest academically.
And yes, the difference in the curve may also have an effect. I imagine AP to be a better predictor for schools that run standard renditions of key courses.
@cleoforshort :" Sometimes the kids need to think about understanding the material rather than blowing through requirements they may see as a nuisance or uninteresting. They also need to understand that when they are at a highly selective school they are surrounded by other really smart kids, some of whom will be smarter and be able to handle the fast pace of a college class - and blow the curve."
I see your point and understand that this happens in AP classes, so it may help if some retook the college rendition, I am just tired of hearing about the curve thing, because it has nothing to do with how the instructor pitches the course: The amount of content , depth of content, cognitive complexity of demands from students does. I’m iffy on the curve thing, because challenging instructors who gives assessments with lower/curve-worthy raw scores make for substantially more room for error unlike in an easier course (where “smarter” certainly will not struggle because they likely already know the content and there is little cognitive complexity), so one may be able to screw up the first exam, catch up, and then do well on others to score a good grade, but you never know. If you take it in the wrong year where there is a lot of other talent, or very well-prepared students in the course, then the curve may either be tighter around the middle or slightly bi-modal. regardless of what the mean/median is. I once tutored students who were initially more “average” who took a challenging instructor in a year with a stronger than normal cohort. The median/mean said one thing, but the distribution was actually skewed towards higher scores, so it took a significant performance beyond means of like 65 or so to just get a B that year and neither made the cut-off even when one had like a 75 average (she improved to it). It just depends on the situation. I just wouldn’t ALWAYS think of this idea of a curve being blown. Just ensure that you have the best foundation possible in the case that the instructor is more challenging than normal. Either way, curves in college are a statistical recentering of the lower raw scores to some letter grade. A couple of very smart students cannot “blow” a curve in a decent sized course. It is usually based upon what the middle and “not super naturally talented in area but works hard” students do.
Sometimes you can’t predict what will happen with regards to relative preparation but you can know that you did everything possible to optimize your chances of rising to whatever challenges. It may be better to think of it as one’s foundation/study habits versus the material/demands. While natural talent (being “smart”) can help a small chunk in some courses, many/most of the B+ and higher scores just do well by working hard and doing all they can to ensure that they have properly learned pre-requisite material, so I wouldn’t ever go in worrying about a curve so much as the complexity(may have little to do with “pace”. Even very smart kids are less prepared for complexity than a fast pace. When courses at elites throw lots of content at students at a fast pace and only expect them to regurgitate details and do surface learning, usually exam averages are relatively high and curves are not needed) of what the chosen instructor is known for requiring.