What makes University Chemistry harder than CC.

[amad01]

---

Members do not see this ad.

There are smart people that will make outstanding physicians at every college, whether it be Harvard or Billy's CC...

That is why it is unfair to judge a single student vs another on where they went to school.

You can judge SCHOOL vs SCHOOL as a whole... no problem. I will tell you Harvard is better... but when it comes to med school admissions and STUDENT vs STUDENT, you could have the best student from a CC vs the worst student at Harvard. (Harvard student still might even be better )

 

[Aerus]

There are smart people that will make outstanding physicians at every college, whether it be Harvard or Billy's CC...

That is why it is unfair to judge a single student vs another on where they went to school.

You can judge SCHOOL vs SCHOOL as a whole... no problem. I will tell you Harvard is better... but when it comes to med school admissions and STUDENT vs STUDENT, you could have the best student from a CC vs the worst student at Harvard. (Harvard student still might even be better )

Yes, of course. But this topic talks more about difficulty of courses (specifically Chemistry) at a CC vs. at a university.

We all know that there are great physicians who never did well in their prereqs. Academic achievement alone, while strongly correlated, does not dictate success and quality of an individual physician.

 

[Jas1360]

You make very great points, but as TangoDown said, I'm going to try not to use anecdotes as part of my reasoning. This is just a logic showdown. There are anecdotes (as seen in this thread alone) about classes at universities being easier or harder for a variety of uncontrolled reasons. It's best to stick with facts that can be generally applied to all institutions of that category.

In reality, nobody can really ever prove if taking a class at a CC is easier than taking a class at a more reputable University, since these things must consider way too many factors. There are also way too many extraneous factors that do not apply to every institution, so statistical comparisons and quantifiable data is, I would think, impossible to obtain.

This topic is more about seeing which logic prevails. In reality, we may never truly know.

I agree that it is impossible to know which class is easier until you have taken it from more than one instructor and at more than one school.

And even if you do take it more than once you have already flawed the ability to judge difficulty because you are bringing a base of knowledge the second time that you did not have the first time.

I just get annoyed when people try to claim CC is inherently easier and ignore all the factors that determine difficulty. Those people may fail to realize the difference in difficulty even in their own university between different instructors.

Also, I always caution people to avoid going CC just because try think it will be easier. I have met and seen plenty of CC classes that were equally difficult as the university class and these students hoping for an easy A would be sorely mistaken.

So, if you are looking for an easy A, just ask people locally who have had the instructor before. That's the best way to get an idea about difficulty level at any particular school. Also, be sure to ask more than one student because the student you ask might not have the same learning style as you and their opinion could be totally wrong compared to your personal experience.

The same is true if you are looking for classes that are truly going to prepare you for your future goals, such as success on the MCAT. You will want to find instructors who cover the important material and test it in a way that requires critical thinking.

 

[Mavii]

You make very great points, but as TangoDown said, I'm going to try not to use anecdotes as part of my reasoning. This is just a logic showdown. There are anecdotes (as seen in this thread alone) about classes at universities being easier or harder for a variety of uncontrolled reasons. It's best to stick with facts that can be generally applied to all institutions of that category.

In reality, nobody can really ever prove if taking a class at a CC is easier than taking a class at a more reputable University, since these things must consider way too many factors. There are also way too many extraneous factors that do not apply to every institution, so statistical comparisons and quantifiable data is, I would think, impossible to obtain.

This topic is more about seeing which logic prevails. In reality, we may never truly know.

Actually, in this case, and most others, I'd rather hear from someone who attended a CC and transferred to a university. In that way, they'd have first hand knowledge, instead of someone (like you) who can only assume. Now assuming isn't bad in itself, we all do it. Bu taking it a step further to the point of bickering back and forth about something you have absolutely no experience with, doesn't reflect that highly on you.

Why is that you are always in threads giving advice and input about things you have yet to experience?

 

[amad01]

Yes, of course. But this topic talks more about difficulty of courses (specifically Chemistry) at a CC vs. at a university.

We all know that there are great physicians who never did well in their prereqs. Academic achievement alone, while strongly correlated, does not dictate success and quality of an individual physician.

In my experience with classes at a 4-year and classes at CC, I feel that the CC is easier because the professor HAS to make it easier otherwise everyone in the class would fail....they have to come down to the learning level of the students...(whether it be easier tests, easier grading, more extra credit, whatever..) and then I end up at the top of the class because I'm one of the 8 people who really care about my grades.

Imagine two teachers teaching the same English course to two different groups. Group A is a tribe in Africa with no English background, and Group B are teenagers in Germany with a little English/educational background. I know this is extreme, but the teacher with Group A HAS to numb the course and make it easier for the students, otherwise everyone would fail and be lost, while Group B will be able to keep up with the course. Now, there might be a few in the tribe who are smart and could be with Group B, so they excel and do well, but the rest of the tribe makes the overall course easier because the teacher must come down to their learning level.

 

[TangoDown]

Ah, thanks for clarifying what you said. I should assume that you wouldn't just plot holes in your post like that. 😛

Let me try to explain it this way then.

Standard for adequate baseline of knowledge at CC = Standard for adequate baseline of knowledge at University?

I consider this "adequate baseline of knowledge" as another grade. If I was teaching a class with students of a lower average caliber, I wouldn't want to grade them exactly the same as the way I graded another class with students of a higher average caliber.

Huh? All schools have different standards of baseline knowledge and performance. You've got kids going into their freshman year at Stanford taking Gen Chem who had 4.0s and 5 APs in HS, and you have kids going into Iowa State with a 3.0 and no APs and taking General Chem.

At CC, there is not a barrier of entry, but there IS a barrier of entry for classes like General Chem. You do not have people taking remedial Chemistry and baseline English classes at Harvard or Columbia. But if a kid takes those courses at a CC in preparation for General Chem and University English at the same CC, who is to say he or she will not be adequately prepared for courses that are just as difficult as what is offered at a typical university?

 

[TangoDown]

In my experience with classes at a 4-year and classes at CC, I feel that the CC is easier because the professor HAS to make it easier otherwise everyone in the class would fail....they have to come down to the learning level of the students...(whether it be easier tests, easier grading, more extra credit, whatever..) and then I end up at the top of the class because I'm one of the 8 people who really care about my grades.

Imagine two teachers teaching the same English course to two different groups. Group A is a tribe in Africa with no English background, and Group B are teenagers in Germany with a little English/educational background. I know this is extreme, but the teacher with Group A HAS to numb the course and make it easier for the students, otherwise everyone would fail and be lost, while Group B will be able to keep up with the course. Now, there might be a few in the tribe who are smart and could be with Group B, so they excel and do well, but the rest of the tribe makes the overall course easier because the teacher must come down to their learning level.

Did you just compare Community College students to ill-educated tribal members in an African village? LOL.

You just negated every point that I argued to discredit the logic similar to yours that is being permeated throughout this thread. Go back and read.

 

[amad01]

Did you just compare Community College students to ill-educated tribal members in an African village? LOL.

You just negated every point that I argued to discredit the logic similar to yours that is being permeated throughout this thread. Go back and read.

Yes I did.

Just speaking of my experience at 2 different 4-years and 4 CC semesters.

CC will tend to be easier, because the average students will hold the class down. As long as you are smarter than everyone else in the class, you will surely get an A.

 

[TangoDown]

Yes I did.

Just speaking of my experience at 2 different 4-years and 4 CC semesters.

CC will tend to be easier, because the average students will hold the class down. As long as you are smarter than everyone else in the class, you will surely get an A.

A. Anecdotal experience based on one CC i= adequate basis for a generalization.

B. Depends on the class. Are you going to find unmotivated dumbos in Elementary Algebra? Probably. Can you find unmotivated dumbos in Organic Chemistry? Probably. But what is the ratio of unmotivated dumbos to smart, motivated individuals? It varies, because like I said, it takes more work to be able to take O-Chem (adequate english, adequate math, adequate hs-level chem knowledge, passing Gen Chem) than it is to take Elementary Algebra (if you can do arithmetic, you can test into Elementary Algebra). Hence, the unmotivated and the stupid get weeded out by the process to get into the (former) class.

 

[Jas1360]

A. Anecdotal experience based on one CC i= adequate basis for a generalization.

B. Depends on the class. Are you going to find unmotivated dumbos in Elementary Algebra? Probably. Can you find unmotivated dumbos in Organic Chemistry? Probably. But what is the ratio of unmotivated dumbos to smart, motivated individuals? It varies, because like I said, it takes more work to be able to take O-Chem (adequate english, adequate math, adequate hs-level chem knowledge, passing Gen Chem) than it is to take Elementary Algebra (if you can do arithmetic, you can test into Elementary Algebra). Hence, the unmotivated and the stupid get weeded out by the process to get into the (former) class.

Another important point. When I think about the composition of my classes, if I think of a social science class it was most likely an easy course with many weaker students. But the science courses that required pre-reqs consisted of smart people, who were motivated, but needed to save money. I know that almost everyone in one of my classes was attempting to get into some type of graduate program. I know 4 students that made it into pharmacy school, 1 in PA school and another one in Dental school. Those were all students I was studying with and of course, most of them were non-traditional students, or they just came from frugal families. I know that there were probably many more of the students that also got into graduate programs but I only kept track of my friends and some of the students I tutored.

 

[amad01]

A. Anecdotal experience based on one CC i= adequate basis for a generalization.

B. Depends on the class. Are you going to find unmotivated dumbos in Elementary Algebra? Probably. Can you find unmotivated dumbos in Organic Chemistry? Probably. But what is the ratio of unmotivated dumbos to smart, motivated individuals? It varies, because like I said, it takes more work to be able to take O-Chem (adequate english, adequate math, adequate hs-level chem knowledge, passing Gen Chem) than it is to take Elementary Algebra (if you can do arithmetic, you can test into Elementary Algebra). Hence, the unmotivated and the stupid get weeded out by the process to get into the (former) class.

Took calc 1,2; engineering physics 1,2; chem 1,2; O-chem 1,2; bio, cell bio all at CC. Got an A and top % of each class. I realized that as long as I out-score everyone else in the class I would get an A. Many motivated and smart students, but not the same as the university. The classes also seemed numbed down to the average CC student (or maybe I was just expecting them to be harder...). Compared O-chem and cell bio tests to my buddy's at the University and they had the same material but much harder tests and more in depth. At 4-year, I feel there is more competition between students to be the top % in the class, so harder to get an A.

Just my experience, I cannot prove anything. Can you really even try to argue that the university will have more unmotivated dumbos than the CC? I think all you can really do with this question is use common sense and leave room for exceptions.

 

[kgpremed11]

The test difficulty thing is a generalization. CCs vary across the country JUST as universities do, and tests are created by individual professors. "My brother's friend down the street that went to Podunk Jr College got an A in Diff. Equations while smoking pot everyday and taking 18 units" is not a representation of all CCs in the country.

In terms of student population, it honestly depends. It is true that you've got a ton of people who don't care or who don't try, but there are always those who do. And they vary depending on the class. At my CC, a lot of UC Berk kids take O-Chem (bad choice if they're trying to get into Med School, as they already attend a university), and they set the curve. Does that mean all CCs have that level of competition in their STEM classes? No. And that's my point.

Now you SHOULD take your STEM classes at a uni IF it's not going to kill you financially, simply to avoid trouble with certain Med Schools. You should also RESEARCH the specific CC you're going to and look at its articulation agreements with various schools. My CC, for example, has an articulation agreement for every major in all UCs and CSUs (California), and many kids transfer from the CC every year and end up at great universities as juniors, are not shell shocked by any major "step up" in difficulty, and do very well. That doesn't mean YOUR CC will be like that. And that's why you should research.

Well, I went straight to uni, but I did have friends that went to cc first. So they showed up to my uni with their 3.7 gpa from cc, and by the end of junior year, their gpa was 3.2, by the end of senior year 2.8? So.......yeah.......uni is harder.

 

[TangoDown]

Well, I went straight to uni, but I did have friends that went to cc first. So they showed up to my uni with their 3.7 gpa from cc, and by the end of junior year, their gpa was 3.2, by the end of senior year 2.8? So.......yeah.......uni is harder.

Uh yeah, again, anecdotal experience along with the fact that there can be a multitude of variables that determined their drop in GPA.

I had 2 doctors in my life that were cold and impersonal. People I know say doctors are pill pushers. Therefore, doctors are cold, impersonal pill pushers that don't care about me.

See where the logic fails?

 

[Mavii]

Uh yeah, again, anecdotal experience along with the fact that there can be a multitude of variables that determined their drop in GPA.

I had 2 doctors in my life that were cold and impersonal. People I know say doctors are pill pushers. Therefore, doctors are cold, impersonal pill pushers that don't care about me.

See where the logic fails?

Nope. I'd say you're right on the mark

 

[Geebeejay]

Why would someone with more research experience and publications be better? That also makes no sense. It is true that a professor will make or break a course, but if noble prize-winning professor walks into my lecture hall and teaches like rock, I'm not going to learn anything.

You misunderstood me. They aren't "better" because they have more research experience and publications. A university, which has more grant money than a CC, is more likely to draw in professors that have previously been established to be "better", or more prestigious, due to the opportunities they would be offered in such an environment.

This doesn't mean the classes are harder at a university - only that professors are more likely to be more reputable: why would a professor choose a location that provides less salary and less academic opportunity at a CC when they have a better offer at a university?

 

[McBatCommander]

At my CC they for the most part have high expectations when it comes to their legit science classes. Biology 1 was moderately hard, but than some classes like Micro were much harder as the professor's test were specifically difficult. And then out Gen Chemistry 1 was kind of a joke, in that while we did hit some of difficult topics, we were given so many chances to make an A, all the casuals could pass with a C without trying. But now I'm in Gen Chemistry 2 and it's a totally different story. And I've heard out Calculus 1 is really really hard. It's like 5 days a week and has a several hour final exam or something.

From my experience, it really matters on the professors. But I'll be heading to a 4 year in August, so maybe when another one of these threads come around I can give more accurate insight.

 

[Aerus]

Actually, in this case, and most others, I'd rather hear from someone who attended a CC and transferred to a university. In that way, they'd have first hand knowledge, instead of someone (like you) who can only assume. Now assuming isn't bad in itself, we all do it. Bu taking it a step further to the point of bickering back and forth about something you have absolutely no experience with, doesn't reflect that highly on you.

Why is that you are always in threads giving advice and input about things you have yet to experience?

Using facts and logic has very little to do with experience. I can argue the reverse that people who've been to a CC and then to a Uni may have biased point of views, if arguing with their anecdotal evidence. They may either want to hype up the difficulty of their CC and say it was MUCH harder than their uni in some attempt to salvage their ego from financially ignorant yet arrogant classmates. Or you have the reverse who might say how easy the CC was compared to their Uni because they want to hype up the difficulty of their 4 year. There's also many other reasons.

Even if this bias is subconscious, it's still bias. Comparing a chemistry class in a CC with a chemistry class in a university is even more difficult using anecdotal evidence, since you've already learned the material. Even if you try to pretend that you never took it before, it won't be the same. You've either took Chemistry at the CC first or at the University first. Either way, the second time won't be the same as if you've never taken Chemistry.

Regarding the last part of your comment, if you haven't jumped off the Grand Canyon before, would you refrain from telling someone else to, just because you have yet to experience it? I won't give my opinion on how difficult something was if I've yet to do it, but common sense things like "Should I apply this cycle with a 3.2 GPA and no clinical experience?" should be answerable without prior experience.

 

[Jas1360]

At my CC they for the most part have high expectations when it comes to their legit science classes. Biology 1 was moderately hard, but than some classes like Micro were much harder as the professor's test were specifically difficult. And then out Gen Chemistry 1 was kind of a joke, in that while we did hit some of difficult topics, we were given so many chances to make an A, all the casuals could pass with a C without trying. But now I'm in Gen Chemistry 2 and it's a totally different story. And I've heard out Calculus 1 is really really hard. It's like 5 days a week and has a several hour final exam or something.

From my experience, it really matters on the professors. But I'll be heading to a 4 year in August, so maybe when another one of these threads come around I can give more accurate insight.

Your experience sounds rather accurate. You will find similar things about the university. Some classes will have hard professors that make you work your butt off for an A while others just expect you to show up and try.

 

[TangoDown]

Nope. I'd say you're right on the mark

Well in that case, in about 8 years, I'll walk into my first patient's room, pimp slap him and then dump a bucket of pills into his lap. I'll then sprint out of the hospital into one of my Lambos.

I can't wait to be a doctor

 

[Jas1360]

I think the take home is that not all CC classes are easy and not all 4 year classes are hard.

Making generalizations will never work because there are too many factors at play.

If you want specific advice for your situation you should ask locals who can tell you about the specific CC or 4 year institution and then you should talk to students about which professors will be best for you to take.

You do not need to take all your classes at a 4 year and there are sometimes financial benefits of taking CC classes.

 

[HopefulSlav]

My CC is in the top five in the nation. Poor me, relegated to the same status as a Johnny Hopkins that smoked weed while taking remedial classes. What will I ever do?

 

[Aerus]

Huh? All schools have different standards of baseline knowledge and performance. You've got kids going into their freshman year at Stanford taking Gen Chem who had 4.0s and 5 APs in HS, and you have kids going into Iowa State with a 3.0 and no APs and taking General Chem.

At CC, there is not a barrier of entry, but there IS a barrier of entry for classes like General Chem. You do not have people taking remedial Chemistry and baseline English classes at Harvard or Columbia. But if a kid takes those courses at a CC in preparation for General Chem and University English at the same CC, who is to say he or she will not be adequately prepared for courses that are just as difficult as what is offered at a typical university?

All schools DO have a different standard, but the standard goes up as you get into the top of the crop. You don't have people taking remedial chemistry in CC, but then again, remedial chemistry is just that. Remedial.

As I said before, if we factor out "ill preparedness" and those economically poor geniuses, you still have people who won't be as motivated, people who just aren't used to working hard, those who aren't as motivated to excel because they aren't throwing 30k-50k tuition each year, and people who just aren't used to handling advanced college material. In order to get an A, you just have to be at the top of the crop, if not slightly less than that. Doing that should be easier if you have a group with an average less caliber.

Again, my UC Irvine vs. San Francisco Community College example. Which chemistry class will be harder to get an A at? Even factoring in the randomness of professors, since both institutions will have a variety of professors, the chem class at UCI will generally be harder to get an A in.

 

[TangoDown]

I think the take home is that not all CC classes are easy and not all 4 year classes are hard.

Making generalizations will never work because there are too many factors at play.

If you want specific advice for your situation you should ask locals who can tell you about the specific CC or 4 year institution and then you should talk to students about which professors will be best for you to take.

You do not need to take all your classes at a 4 year and there are sometimes financial benefits of taking CC classes.

This. Research the CC you're thinking of going to just like a university. Are classes readily available or are they impacted?

Also, just like university, utilize ratemyprofessor.com. CC professors are listed too. You want a challenge because you think CC classes are easy as pie? Take the professor who has a 1 star for easiness. All the professors have high marks for easiness and you don't think the class will adequately prepare you for uni and the MCAT? Don't take the class(s) there.

 

[TangoDown]

All schools DO have a different standard, but the standard goes up as you get into the top of the crop. You don't have people taking remedial chemistry in CC, but then again, remedial chemistry is just that. Remedial.

As I said before, if we factor out "ill preparedness" and those economically poor geniuses, you still have people who won't be as motivated, people who just aren't used to working hard, those who aren't as motivated to excel because they aren't throwing 30k-50k tuition each year, and people who just aren't used to handling advanced college material. In order to get an A, you just have to be at the top of the crop, if not slightly less than that. Doing that should be easier if you have a group with an average less caliber.

Again, my UC Irvine vs. San Francisco Community College example. Which chemistry class will be harder to get an A at? Even factoring in the randomness of professors, since both institutions will have a variety of professors, the chem class at UCI will generally be harder to get an A in.

So why do you not assume that those people who aren't motivated and willing don't fail the class or drop the class? In hard classes like O-Chem, you don't end with the same number of people you started with.

Why do you assume that class difficulty will be lowered for those who can't handle college level material? One would assume that those people wouldn't be able to pass the class, and would fail, or would not be in the class to begin with.

Another anecdotal example, but like I said before, about 75% of the people in my English class last semester dropped. Was the standard of the class lowered to accommodate them? No.

You can't just assume that unmotivated student + hard class = class becomes less hard, just because that's the common stigma with CCs floating around amongst med school advisers, many pre-meds (who have never even stepped foot into a CC), and a number of Medical Schools who don't accept CC credits.

 

[Aerus]

So why do you not assume that those people who aren't motivated and willing don't fail the class or drop the class? In hard classes like O-Chem, you don't end with the same number of people you started with.

Why do you assume that class difficulty will be lowered for those who can't handle college level material? One would assume that those people wouldn't be able to pass the class, and would fail, or would not be in the class to begin with.

Some do, some don't. If everyone who did badly in a class dropped it, you wouldn't see those C-'s, D's, and F's. 😉

 

[TangoDown]

Some do, some don't. If everyone who did badly in a class dropped it, you wouldn't see those C-'s, D's, and F's. 😉

Okay, then if you've got people getting bad grades in the class because they were unmotivated, then there is no evidence to suggest that the class has been altered to accommodate them...

 

[Jas1360]

All schools DO have a different standard, but the standard goes up as you get into the top of the crop. You don't have people taking remedial chemistry in CC, but then again, remedial chemistry is just that. Remedial.

As I said before, if we factor out "ill preparedness" and those economically poor geniuses, you still have people who won't be as motivated, people who just aren't used to working hard, those who aren't as motivated to excel because they aren't throwing 30k-50k tuition each year, and people who just aren't used to handling advanced college material. In order to get an A, you just have to be at the top of the crop, if not slightly less than that. Doing that should be easier if you have a group with an average less caliber.

Again, my UC Irvine vs. San Francisco Community College example. Which chemistry class will be harder to get an A at? Even factoring in the randomness of professors, since both institutions will have a variety of professors, the chem class at UCI will generally be harder to get an A in.

One flaw is that you are under the impression that all teachers actually care about the class average. It appears as though you have not had many professors who will teach what they feel you need to know and will test you based on the assumption that you have lofty career goals. These teachers do not care if the class average on the exam is a 70% or 50%. They have their grade scale set up at the beginning and if you do not get x% you will not get the grade you want. These are usually the same ones who do not round up 89.9 to a 90.0, etc.

So teachers like this exist at all types of schools and their class is usually considered difficult by all students because they refuse to teach down to the class. Students know about these teachers and unmotivated students know not to bother signing up and others will drop. So those who are left will earn whatever grade they deserve and I would be confident in saying they could earn that grade at any school because the teacher is the one who set the difficulty level, not the student body.

 

[Aerus]

Okay, then if you've got people getting bad grades in the class because they were unmotivated, then there is no evidence to suggest that the class has been altered to accommodate them...

Nope, I have no evidence whatsoever. Nobody can provide evidence for that without bringing in something anecdotal (and by that logic, bias).

But what about the people who are trying super hard but just aren't used to handling advanced material? There's got to be a lot of them. Again, these people come from a lot of academic backgrounds (be it no resources to get into a 4 year, not enough prep, not enough motivation, never grew up in a supportive environment, etc.) You have these people at 4 years too, but they managed to surpass those barriers.

I feel like I'm rambling. My point is, if you're one of those economically struggling smart people in your CC chem class, you'll generally have an easier time facing against those type of people above. In a 4 year, they'll generally be facing against people who have surpassed those barriers and can be much more durable. You'll also meet people who were pampered since childhood and are used to the academic environment (something you don't see in CC's, usually).

And to address all those people who say "each class is different and dependent on the professor", again, yes I know. But I'm talking about general trends. I was never referring to individual cases. There are tons of exceptions. But the general trend is that CC classes will be easier to get that A. You aren't facing as many people who are considered the cream of the crop.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Generally tests at a CC are set up so that students have a fighting chance and the curve sets itself up by itself. At a University a professor creates tests that he knows the majority will not score above an 80% on and will curve the course towards a new average usually 60 to 65%.

I don't think the material is ever that much different or else university programs would be pissed. I mean if a school doesn't teach the material well why allow that student to take upper level courses in that field that they will be completely confused in?

 

[Aerus]

One flaw is that you are under the impression that all teachers actually care about the class average. It appears as though you have not had many professors who will teach what they feel you need to know and will test you based on the assumption that you have lofty career goals. These teachers do not care if the class average on the exam is a 70% or 50%. They have their grade scale set up at the beginning and if you do not get x% you will not get the grade you want. These are usually the same ones who do not round up 89.9 to a 90.0, etc.

So teachers like this exist at all types of schools and their class is usually considered difficult by all students because they refuse to teach down to the class. Students know about these teachers and unmotivated students know not to bother signing up and others will drop. So those who are left will earn whatever grade they deserve and I would be confident in saying they could earn that grade at any school because the teacher is the one who set the difficulty level, not the student body.

Of course not all teachers are like that! It would be silly of me to make such an extreme assumption. My opinion reflects the general trends. If a professor at a CC wants to fail a huge chunk of the class each year, they may be free to do so. There are other professors who do accommodate, however.

I loved DAPI's comparison. The biology textbooks I have here at my school are the same ones used in my high school for AP Biology. Why do people who've already taken AP biology (same textbook, same material) still do badly when they come to university? Because the high school students aren't used to the advanced material, so the classes are easier back in high school.

 

[Jas1360]

@Aerus

Does your school use a curve system? It seems as all your arguments are based on competing with your peers. Not all schools and instructors do it that way. That makes a huge difference. If every school used a curve system the level of your peers would be a much bigger factor than some students have experienced.

 

[Aerus]

@Aerus

Does your school use a curve system? It seems as all your arguments are based on competing with your peers. Not all schools and instructors do it that way. That makes a huge difference. If every school used a curve system the level of your peers would be a much bigger factor than some students have experienced.

Excellent point. My school has professors who can go in either group. I've had a professor last quarter who based everything completely off a curve. A 98% doesn't mean anything if everyone else got a 99%.

On the other hand, I had another professor who did not curve at all. She just taught the material, gave her own exams, and used the raw score to determine your grade.

I'm not talking exactly about a curve, but if a professor at Princeton used their exact teaching methods and testing methods and material at whatever CC, I can imagine a large portion of the class failing. I'm sure the professors that would be willing to fail a large portion of the class are in the minority. But if there are statistics that suggest otherwise, I'll concede to that.

 

[Jas1360]

Generally tests at a CC are set up so that students have a fighting chance and the curve sets itself up by itself. At a University a professor creates tests that he knows the majority will not score above an 80% on and will curve the course towards a new average usually 60 to 65%.

I don't think the material is ever that much different or else university programs would be pissed. I mean if a school doesn't teach the material well why allow that student to take upper level courses in that field that they will be completely confused in?

What kind of grading system does your school use? I am guessing all of your professors also curve? Do they use a standard bell curve and actually move people down letter grade too, or only up?

 

[Jas1360]

Excellent point. My school has professors who can go in both groups. I've had a professor last quarter who based everything completely off a curve. A 98% doesn't mean anything if everyone else got a 99%.

On the other hand, I had another professor who did not curve at all. She just taught the material, gave her own exams, and used the raw score to determine your grade.

Ok, that makes sense to why you are very adamant about the quality of your peers. The CC and the 4 years that I am currently close to do not curve, with a few rare exceptions. One example was the university curved up some of the individual exams so the class average was closer to C instead of D. Usually, around here the syllabus states the percentage for each letter grade and that is what grade you will get.

The local CC and University were in a very close relationship at one point, before all the CCs in the state unified, and the test and curriculum would have been identical but know there is a little more freedom. Not much because the CC has to make sure that they meet certain standards so that the classes can transfer without hitch.

The other CC I went to, in high school in a different state, also used a straight percentage scale and they could care less what the class test average was.

Trying not to tell too much of my story but the private university I went to, in a different state, lol, also used a percentage system but did have some upward curving based on class average for each exam.

 

[Aerus]

Ok, that makes sense to why you are very adamant about the quality of your peers. The CC and the 4 years that I am currently close to do not curve, with a few rare exceptions. One example was the university curved up some of the individual exams so the class average was closer to C instead of D. Usually, around here the syllabus states the percentage for each letter grade and that is what grade you will get.

The local CC and University were in a very close relationship at one point, before all the CCs in the state unified, and the test and curriculum would have been identical but know there is a little more freedom. Not much because the CC has to make sure that they meet certain standards so that the classes can transfer without hitch.

The other CC I went to, in high school in a different state, also used a straight percentage scale and they could care less what the class test average was.

Trying not to tell too much of my story but the private university I went to, in a different state, lol, also used a percentage system but did have some upward curving based on class average for each exam.

Yeah, I see why you feel strongly about that too.

The main reason why I'm adamant about this is (regretfully), I've been in the situation many times where the student body determined the difficulty of the class (NONE of the classes were curved, either) and so I have straight hand experience on this. I've witnessed this phenomena time and time again.

I'm just using the facts that I've analyzed in my experiences.

 

[Jas1360]

Yeah, I see why you feel strongly about that too.

The main reason why I'm adamant about this is (regretfully), I've been in the situation many times where the student body determined the difficulty of the class (NONE of the classes were curved, either) and so I have straight hand experience on this. I've witnessed this phenomena time and time again.

I'm just using the facts that I've analyzed in my experiences.

Yes, I can see where you are coming from. I only express the other side so much because some people will read your opinion and assume that every CC is easy and every CC student is lazy or dumb.

Without a multitude of experience people often do not see what is beyond their own experience or are unwilling to admit that there is more than one possibility.

 

[Daneosaurus]

The answer is the test is harder.

Whether this means the test is more in depth or has more breadth or w/e, the answer is the same.

Things that can make this harder can be as simple as not giving constants, like the molar gas constant (think pv=nRt) or making students use it in its atmospheric constant or Pascal's, or mmHg or w/e. Making students memorize all these values can add significant difficulty to the exam. Also, multiple choice vs short answer, how the question is asked, how many questions on the exam there are (time spent/question), patial credit, what kind of calculator vs no calculator.

A thousands things can make a test more difficult so for us to try to list them would be futile.

My Gen Chem classes required us to remember the molar gas constant in mmHG/torr and atm, differentiate btw Boyle's and Charles's Laws, memorize the general solubility rules, memorize the "magnificent 7" (as my g chem 2 prof referred to them) strong acids, etc.

And I attended/ am attending a community college.

We have had 5 people, out of a 17 student class, already drop physics. 2 of them between lecture and lab tonight. I think they got scared off by the trig and 2-d kinematics.

 

[squat]

I'm a non-trad. Graduated from a well-respected, competitive university (non-premed), followed-up years later at a CC, and am currently enrolled at my local university (not as competitive as my undergrad). Here is my perspective:

Some of the science classes I took as an undergrad were graded on a curve (like the one in which I got a 56 on the final and an A in the class) and others weren't (still got an A in the class). The biggest difference I experienced between undergrad and CC was that my CC classes were smaller and my professors were ALWAYS available/approachable to answer questions. None seemed to enjoy failing students.

I was VERY worried that my CC premed classes wouldn't cut-it, and talked at length with one of my professors about it. He had taught at Berkley prior to coming to my home-state for post-grad and eventually taking a job at the CC. His point of view was that an A student (95%+) is an A student at both schools. The only place he felt like there was inflation was in the C+ Berkley students being B- students at the CC. But he quickly added that any way you sliced it, a B- student wasn't going to get into medical school.

Since finishing my prereqs at the CC, I've taken some additional classes at the local university where tuition is twice as costly. I'm not impressed with the professors I've had. It seems like they think it is fun to fail students. Some how I managed to squeek an A out of my last class...I'm pretty sure he graded on a curve even though he swore he wouldn't because so many people were failing the midterms.

Even as a late applicant, I have been invited to interview at six different schools. You can make a CC work if you are willing to be perfect and take additional course to show you have the ability to function in upper-division classes. (And for what it's worth, I think there are plenty of universities that are just over-grown CCs.)

 

[Koosalagoosagoo]

My CC is in the top five in the nation. Poor me, relegated to the same status as a Johnny Hopkins that smoked weed while taking remedial classes. What will I ever do?

I think I go to the largest CC in the country, not sure though...

 

[MedPR]

I'm wondering if anyone who is taking pre med classes at a university could help me out here. What is it about undergrad Pre reqs (chem,bio,ect.) that make them harder than the same Community College course. You don't have to be a transfer student to answer this but that answer would probably be best.

I mean we generally use the same books, I even have some teachers here that taught sciences at universities. We have smaller class sizes and its easy for us to talk to our teacher before/after class even during class, but some universities have small classes to. So what is it, someone give me a breakdown that you find makes your Chem/Bio ect. more difficult than it needs to be or more difficult than a CC.



I'll be glad to hear your gripes/complaints or input about how your class is tougher than it should be or whatever have you, im just looking for something to compare my college to before I transfer to know what I may have been missing.

I took gen chem at a uni, then retook it at a CC. My CC class was easier for several reasons:

1. Not everything was covered. We skipped some of the more difficult topics like acids/bases.
2. Everything was covered in much less detail. Test questions rarely took more than 1 step to complete, and probably never more than 2 steps.
3. Test questions were exactly like homework questions. At uni, the test questions are typically much more difficult than homework/study-guide questions.
4. Not only are things covered in less detail, but they are also covered more slowly. Think about it, less detail = more time to focus on basic concepts = slower pace.
5. Teacher tried very hard not to let anyone fall behind. This slowed the pace of the class even more.

While the class was way easier than my university gen chem, I will say that I learned the basics much better at CC and it really helped for the MCAT. What little time I did spend studying for class was spent 100% on basic concept mastery, unlike at university where I often got caught up in just trying to memorize steps to solving a certain type of problem or memorize minute details that I thought would be tested. Easier classes aren't always bad for your future if you take the time to learn it really well.

 

[MedPR]

My CC is in the top five in the nation. Poor me, relegated to the same status as a Johnny Hopkins that smoked weed while taking remedial classes. What will I ever do?

How exactly are community colleges ranked?

 

[squat]

I think I go to the largest CC in the country, not sure though...

Hmm. My CC likes to say it is the biggest in the nation. (Only problem is that I know Northern Virginia CC has at least 75,000+ students and mine has around 60,000.) I always thought it was silly that being the largest CC was a bragging-right.

 

[The Beyonder]

At my CC we did not skip any topics, I felt very prepared for the MCAT. I would say the biggest difference between CC and Uni were the extra large auditorium sized classes. I was happy I took my classes in a setting were we had to learn the material (no easy A's), but we could go see the teacher and get personalized attention.

 

[Koosalagoosagoo]

Hmm. My CC likes to say it is the biggest in the nation. (Only problem is that I know Northern Virginia CC has at least 75,000+ students and mine has around 60,000.) I always thought it was silly that being the largest CC was a bragging-right.

To be honest it's just an extension of my local university. It's pretty much just a mill to get people in and out...

 

[Jas1360]

So from all the examples I think it is starting to show that CCs can have easy and difficult courses and so can Universities.

The biggest difference when I went to the big University verses the smaller Private University was the class size. Larger classes are naturally more intimidating and the instructors often seem unapproachable. It took me a couple semesters to realize that office hours were beneficial and not all the instructors would bite my head off if I asked a presumably dumb question. At the CC I was never afraid of asking a question. Once I got comfortable talking to instructors in the large university I found that most of the instructors were just as helpful and friendly, as long as you were courteous and respectful of their time constraints.

 

[katiemaude]

I took general chemistry at a top-10 university and later at a CC for financial reasons. I kept my notebook and textbook from the university. The depth of the course was about the same. The tests at the CC were actually harder, because they required every answer to show work, which gave us more of a chance to lose points even if we got the answer correct. The university tests (where there were more than 200 students in the lecture) were all multiple choice so even if you had no idea what you were doing you could guess.

The labs at the university were chaotic and I barely learned anything. I learned more in the CC lecture and lab because of the size of the class.

I am not sure if the university professor graded on a curve (it's possible) but the CC professor did not.

So in terms of difficulty, the curve would be the only thing making the university class more difficult (if it was indeed graded on a curve).

The material was 95 percent identical and the CC class was more in depth on several topics. I think it's going to vary depending on the professor and CC/university, but to say all CC classes are less in depth would be incorrect.

 

[TangoDown]

I think I go to the largest CC in the country, not sure though...

How many people go to yours?

 

[sinombre]

I took general chemistry at a top-10 university and later at a CC for financial reasons. I kept my notebook and textbook from the university. The depth of the course was about the same. The tests at the CC were actually harder, because they required every answer to show work, which gave us more of a chance to lose points even if we got the answer correct. The university tests (where there were more than 200 students in the lecture) were all multiple choice so even if you had no idea what you were doing you could guess.

The labs at the university were chaotic and I barely learned anything. I learned more in the CC lecture and lab because of the size of the class.

I am not sure if the university professor graded on a curve (it's possible) but the CC professor did not.

So in terms of difficulty, the curve would be the only thing making the university class more difficult (if it was indeed graded on a curve).

The material was 95 percent identical and the CC class was more in depth on several topics. I think it's going to vary depending on the professor and CC/university, but to say all CC classes are less in depth would be incorrect.

I don't think anyone is claiming that every single community college class is easier. We're talking about a generalization, and it's a pretty straight-forward and intuitive generalization.

And for an anecdotal response: the science courses I took at a community college were great, but I had an easier time doing well. The material covered is probably very similar across the board, especially for lower division/standardized subjects like chemistry and biology. But I absolutely noticed a difference in how much work I had to put in to be in the top of the class between the two institutions I attended.

 

[Titus Times]

I don't think anyone is claiming that every single community college class is easier. We're talking about a generalization, and it's a pretty straight-forward and intuitive generalization.

And for an anecdotal response: the science courses I took at a community college were great, but I had an easier time doing well. The material covered is probably very similar across the board, especially for lower division/standardized subjects like chemistry and biology. But I absolutely noticed a difference in how much work I had to put in to be in the top of the class between the two institutions I attended.

Thats pretty true

all of the post have been great but it seems like people are trying to argue whether CC easier or not. Also whether CC student are motivated/lazy and less intelligent students and that really has nothing to do with the question.

My peers have an influence on the curve that is a given however my question was more along the lines of what specifically in the class at a University make it difficult. A few people have touched on some of the specifics like actuall info about the depth of certain chapters, thats the type of answers we need. Everyone goes to diff Uni. and CC's so im not comparing each one just looking for evidenc of why your Uni. science course may be tougher than need be and or not too tough at all.

But its about the specifics in the classroom, individual students motives/backgrounds/abilities are less important to the answer.

 

[Jas1360]

Thats pretty true

all of the post have been great but it seems like people are trying to argue whether CC easier or not. Also whether CC student are motivated/lazy and less intelligent students and that really has nothing to do with the question.

My peers have an influence on the curve that is a given however my question was more along the lines of what specifically in the class at a University make it difficult. A few people have touched on some of the specifics like actuall info about the depth of certain chapters, thats the type of answers we need. Everyone goes to diff Uni. and CC's so im not comparing each one just looking for evidenc of why your Uni. science course may be tougher than need be and or not too tough at all.

But its about the specifics in the classroom, individual students motives/backgrounds/abilities are less important to the answer.

So here is what makes a class tough:

Poor teaching
Large classrooms with inability to ask specific questions
Depth of material or needless memorization requirements
The types of questions and how they are asked, multiple choice or showing work, or essay
Learning style of the student
Instructors that ask questions that actually require you to integrate the material and apply it to a new situation, so critical thinking style questions