Taking classes at CC vs 4 year Update

[blueclassring]

I contact an admissions officer at the University Of Southern California and she stated that it is preferred that you take your pre-reqs at a 4 year university. If you do choose to take them at a CC, you should get As.

Just letting you know...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Apteka]

That's really interesting, though slightly odd, since 1 out of 2 classes that I took at a CC as a prereq was actually REALLY a LOT more challenging(OChem Lab, 2nd semester) than when i took it at a 4 year university. The writeups were intense and the material we covered was a LOT more than i ever covered at a university. They even had an IR machine where we would analyze our own samples of product, evaluate the spectrum, etc! (They did not have that at my university!)

not sure where you are in the process, but good luck!!!

 

[WildOrchids27]

I really think people claim that classes at a University is a lot harder because most of the time the classes are huge. You don't really get the attention you need from your professors. You're just a number to them and its really hard to ask questions. Whereas, taking classes at a CC you get more one on one oppotunities. If you have questions you can just ask then and there and its not so intimidating. For example, taking a chem class at a University versus a CC, you learn basically the same materials and sometimes use the same text books. There's no special way to teach chem. Students taking chem at a University don't have more materials to learn. You basically learn the same concepts, terms etc. Thats just what I think. I took classes both at a CC and at a University. It all really depends on the teacher. When you get a really good instructor, the material always seem to be a lot easier.

 

[endlesslove]

I really think people claim that classes at a University is a lot harder because most of the time the classes are huge.

maybe but i didn't think of it that way.

For example, taking a chem class at a University versus a CC, you learn basically the same materials and sometimes use the same text books. There's no special way to teach chem. Students taking chem at a University don't have more materials to learn. You basically learn the same concepts, terms etc.

true, but where things differ a lot, in my opinion, is the level of difficulty of exams and that's not just between University and CC but also among the universities (Harvard vs. Devry, eg) [yeah, devry is supposedly a university]. just my 2 cents

 

[kayjay]

I really think people claim that classes at a University is a lot harder because most of the time the classes are huge. You don't really get the attention you need from your professors. You're just a number to them and its really hard to ask questions. Whereas, taking classes at a CC you get more one on one oppotunities.

I think it depends on where you go. State schools obviously will have the bigger class sizes. At the university I attend, there's definitely a lot of one-on-one interaction, and my professors are almost always available and more than willing to work around students' schedules for appointments outside of class, oftentimes, right after class. Class sizes are about 30, 50 students at most. In fact, there's only about 10 of us in my pharmacology class. First day of class, he was referring to each of us by our names. My sisters attend a CC and seeing the material and notes that the professor prepares for the students, esp. the science courses, they've got it made. The material may be the same, but I agree that the level of difficulty when it comes to tests, may not. Just my opinion.

 

[ultracet]

While classes may not be easier at a CC the fact is the OP said that they contacted U of Southern California and they prefer pre-reqs taken at a 4 year institute

No one is saying that one is harder, people are more qualified etc.

The school told an individual that and that is not up for debate. So like it or not... The individual at Southern California likes 4 yr institutions

 

[imperial frog]

I really think people claim that classes at a University is a lot harder because most of the time the classes are huge. You don't really get the attention you need from your professors.

Depends on the person. Some people need professor interaction, some don't.

 

[Betty'sBeast]

Isn't this the reason for the PCAT? To measure what you have actually learned in your classes? I have taken classes at both a CC and a university (majority at a university), and I have found that the level of difficulty is solely determined by your professor, not by whether it is a 2 or 4 year institution. Let's face it, chemistry is chemistry, biology is biology, etc. It's not like the universities are hoarding some secret knowledge, that they only give to their students, to give them a great advantage over CC students. I have also found that my CC night classes offer a great mix of diversity as far as background is concerned. Most university day classes are full of 19 year olds using daddy's money to do take a class they really don't want to be a part of. I realize this is not the case 100% of the time, but I prefer my night classes. People WANT to be there, they use their own money, they work, they want to learn, and they don't worry about what Jane Doe thinks about their clothing selection for the day. I really don't know why the argument between 2 and 4 year institutions is striking such a nerve in this forum. Isn't the point of your pre-reqs to learn? If you think you can learn more at a university, go to a university. If you prefer to learn at a CC, go to a CC. Can't we all just get along!

 

[WildOrchids27]

Goodness gracious! I didn't think people would get so offended. I've read so many different threads about this one topic and I just thought I should put my two cents in this time around. I didn't mean to make a big deal out of it. People have their own opinions and I shared mine. I'm not saying one is better than the other. I went to both and had great experiences from both. Like someone mentioned before, USC prefer applicants who took their pre-reqs at a 4-year institute vs. a 2 year, and I'm sure most pharmacy schools feel the same way. So just do what you have to do.

 

[Smilescali]

I also think it greatly depends on the professor since there really is no standard at any college or between colleges. One student could have a horrible experience while another student could have a wonderful experience taking the same class at the same college. I currently am taking an Anatomy class at a CC and the professor used to teach at a highly regarded 4 year university. He is a great teacher, but his tests are hard and it is the same material he taught at the 4 year school. (Even though I don't consider Anatomy hard at all.) Many students in my class go to a 4 year university but could not get into any Anatomy classes there and they say that they were expecting an "easy" A class at the CC and boy were they wrong.

I think there is a general perception the CC classes are less demanding and challenging than their 4 year counterparts. I don't believe this is true completely, but it may be because one may have experienced a truly hard professor at a 4 year and an easy one at a CC. Believe me, my G CHem 2 professor at the CC was THE CHEM NAZI! She was so darn hard I still have nightmares. So they do exist at the CC level!

Regarding USC, they do say that they prefer applicants finishing prereqs at a 4 year, but they seem to be the only school that I have talked with to openly say that. USN, UOP, UCSF, Western, Loma Linda and Glendale do not care as long as you have a strong GPA.

Susan

 

[imperial frog]

Goodness gracious! I didn't think people would get so offended... I didn't mean to make a big deal out of it.

I don't see the offense in any of the replies...yet. No one seems to be taking any umbrage over what you said; they are only giving their own views and no one is making a big deal out of it.

 

[Crazy_Norwegian]

If you think you can learn more at a university, go to a university. If you prefer to learn at a CC, go to a CC. Can't we all just get along!

I agreed with the rest of your post, about how the PCAT is how the schools can tell what you really learned. However, I disagree with the above quote. I attend CC for three reasons.
1) The "local" university is over 50 miles away.
2) They don't offer my classes as night classes (at least, not many).
This is a problem since I work fulltime Monday - Friday.
3) Tuition is four times what I pay at the community college!

 

[WVURxGal]

Isn't this the reason for the PCAT? To measure what you have actually learned in your classes?

The man that's my mentor for all things pre-pharmacy told me that at least at WVU, the PCAT score tends to be looked at as an indicator of future success in pharmacy school. Students with higher scores (the 90+s) tend to have the highest pharm school GPAs, students near the average for the school (which was 76 as of last year) tend to have the more average GPAs, assuming students don't totally slack off after acceptance.

I thought that PCAT was just supposed to be a look at what you already know, but I guess they believe that how well you've absorbed and retained material (assuming a student doesn't artifically inflate their grade by crash studying the night before, which I'd imagine wouldn't have that much of an effect anyway because of the volume of material) predicts how well you'll learn pharmacy material. Although that seems a little silly, that's the official way that WVU considers the PCAT score. I must say that at WVU, it certainly seems to be true. The people I've met with the 90+s in the PCAT are the ones that are regarded as "the smart ones" and have near straight As no matter what classes they're in; people closer to the 76 average have As, Bs, Cs, whatever, depending on their strength in a certain subject.

 

[imperial frog]

I thought that PCAT was just supposed to be a look at what you already know, but I guess they believe that how well you've absorbed and retained material (assuming a student doesn't artifically inflate their grade by crash studying the night before, which I'd imagine wouldn't have that much of an effect anyway because of the volume of material) predicts how well you'll learn pharmacy material. Although that seems a little silly, that's the official way that WVU considers the PCAT score.

The PCAT and other standardized entrance exams are designed to only be predictors of future success in whatever field they are used in. An individual's grade of course is going to be influenced by what they have learned, but they aren't supposed to be a measure of what you know but whether you have what it takes to do well in the future.

I know this doesn't apply on the individual level...we all probably know (or are) someone who scored low on the PCAT or SAT and wound up doing exceptional, or someone who scored high and wound up dropping out because they couldn't handle it. But when taken as a whole (providing biases have been eliminated), the tests can give the schools a decent chance of selecting the students who will wind up being able to handle the demands. Of course this shouldn't be the sole tool used for making the choice.