[1672] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: [Mit-talk] Progress of the Task Force on Undergraduate
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Glasser)
Wed Nov 16 21:17:33 2005
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 21:17:15 -0500
From: David Glasser <glasser@mit.edu>
To: Natan Cliffer <natan@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20051117014217.GD20303@mit.edu>
cc: mit-talk@mit.edu
Errors-To: mit-talk-bounces@mit.edu
On 11/16/05, Natan Cliffer <natan@mit.edu> wrote:
> I'm leery of this change. When the frosh first get on campus, the
> most important thing for them is to be comfortable. Studying for and
> worrying about advanced standing exams is not exactly the most
> comforting introduction to campus you could have, and it takes away
> the time that could be better spent making social connections.
>
> What's the reason they gave for not accepting any more AP credit? Do
> people who passed out of courses with AP do much worse?
Actually, Jessie, can you clarify this point? In a previous iteration
of the Task Force (or some subset of it)'s reports, I believe they
were recommending that AP credit give placement but not credit for the
"new GIRs" -- ie, that having AP physics would mean that your "GIR
physics" would be a more advanced physics course. Is that still what
they're suggesting, or merely that AP would be ignored outside of 18?
--dave
--
David Glasser | glasser@mit.edu | http://www.davidglasser.net/
_______________________________________________
MIT-talk mailing list
MIT-talk@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mit-talk
