<p>@iamoym I disagree with zentiger. While I agree with his notion that the cohort system is an excellent way to meet new people and make some friends, the class IS a “subjective mess” which could either help you a ton or destroy you. And I’m not speaking from bitterness–I did better than I deserved to. The classes are divided in to 6 teams of 10. You work with your team on a particular project. There are two layers of determining the grade: the first layer is where your team ranks out of 6. The second layer is where you rank on your team. On a top ranked team (determined by the professor based on how good the team appears), the majority of the students will get As no matter how competent or incompetent they were. On the bottom ranked team, majority of the team will get Bs. There is only one person who determines your rank on the team–your TA. And his decision is based solely on not what you do, but rather what you seem like you’re doing. This helps some and hurts others. I know students who did the most work on there team but still got screwed because not enough people recognized it. I’ve noticed the reverse–people who schemed to seem like they did something even though they didn’t. Even still, people who did the minimal on their team but still did well because the team was perceived as good. It is a political game, so play it well. As to the subject matter in the class, it is extremely un-engaging and universally regarded as “bs” content. The professors aren’t bad, but the content is frustrating because it is reminiscent of elementary education. In the end, if you approach the class knowing that in order to do well, you need to appear very competent and active, you should not have a problem. Even on the lowest ranked team, there will still be a about two people who get A range.</p>