Wow, thank you all so much, especially Lori D for doing the research on AZ stuff and pointing me to threads on financing. Her family's path and current context is so completely different than our family's path and context it was hard to even think what the relevant questions might be. You all have been amazing!

Thanks for all the replies. I am in MA, but the question is for a friend in AZ. Follow up question: If you apply as a first year and transfer in more than a year's worth credits (or even two years of credits), will places let you graduate in 2.5 or 3 years? I spotted checked a few schools that m family has engaged with, and one had a clear residency requirement (i.e., no getting out in under 4 years) and others said nothing or said 50% of your credits or two years of your credits had to be from that college (the one you would be getting a degree from. The other thing I saw was schools saying that kids coming in with substantial DE or AP/IB credit could get a master's in the four years (instead of a fifth) or could take time for extra co-op without delaying graduation. I think the primary goal for this family will probably be trying to minimize years of tuition paid to get a degree.

If a high school student in their junior and senior years takes enough community college classes DE to get an associates degree, do they apply to four-year colleges as a transfer or as a first-year? Thanks.

Re concerns about posting negative reviews - I had no basis for thinking there could be negative repercussions other than my own thoughts; I had never personally had a relevant bad experience nor had I ever heard of one. However, I was very concerned that we might need a rec letter from that teacher, as that was his only outside non-STEM teacher, and I was aware of at least one school on the radar where we would need exactly that. Also, as @Farrar suggested, there was also my (imagined) concern that speaking very publicly and negatively about one PAH teacher could (potentially) have repercussions with the organization (e.g., getting transcript requests filled in a timely and accurate way). And the community is small enough that even posting with a username on this forum would not make it too difficult to connect the dots to figure out who probably wrote the comments. In general, I think DS has had some teachers who seem like they would be quite fine with people pointing out things that could be improved (e.g., Mr. Moskaluk), and then there are others who don't seem like they would be as open to constructive feedback. Requiring non-anonymized feedback as a graded assignment does not seem like the best way forward for someone who truly wants constructive feedback.

Going back to the original post ... I have waited patiently until I felt I could safely publish feedback on Julia Reed's PAH Comparative Government class. Others have mentioned not seeing many negative reviews for classes on the PAH website, but I know I am very hesitant to leave negative feedback there just because I don't know how it might come back to bite us. Heck, it's making me a little nervous even to leave feedback here, even though now college apps are all done and we'll never have a reason to use a PAH class again. Also of note - one of the last class assignments for points (*NOT* extra credit) was to fill out a feedback form for her class, and, as far as I could tell, it was not the least bit anonymous. So when Ms. Reed says she has very positive feedback from students, keep that in mind. For starters - DS had a great experience with Jack Kernion PAH Physics C (Mech and E/M) and with Mr. Moskaluk PAH Chemistry (BTW, he no longer uses the very expensive lab kit). Also an okay experience with Susan Gilleran PAH BC Calc (although the 20+ pages of daily notes were a bit much for my numbers-oriented guy who reads slowly, so he often didn't bother reading them and just used the textbook for instruction). For context, DS's best mode of instruction is textbook reading and pre-recorded videos where he can pause them and think about the content and try working out the problems himself before proceeding. So about Comp Gov. To be fair, Comp Gov is probably the single hardest AP to teach because the content is constantly changing. Ms. Reed seems to be very well-connected in Washington and seems to really know her stuff. That said, with a few exceptions, the class seems like it got frozen in time in 2014 or 2015; DS took it 2019-2020. Sadly, there were SO many times the kids were reading articles or watching videos that were 5 years old when she could have been using articles or videos on the same people or same issues that were only months old. Also, sometimes her written introduction for an article or an assignment was so outdated (never having been modified from the initial creation of the assignment) that it was wrong (like the status of a Russian assassination investigation). I'm sure in 2015 this class was state of the art, but four years later, the world had moved on. We were probably more aware of this than most because both DS and I read The Economist; I don't know if people who didn't follow world news would realize the major disconnect between the class content and current reality. It is possible that this year (2020-2021) she updated more of the content; I'm just telling you what it was like in 2019-2020. Also, on a completely different front, she seemed completely surprised to find out, a week *after* the class started, that the College Board had completely redone the course and the test for the 2019-2020 school year, including a total change top-to-bottom in the FRQs; it is hard to understand how she could have missed the memo on that, especially considering that US Gov (which she also teaches) had undergone the same rewrite for 2018-2019. Even in April, when she started assigning test prep, *all* of the FRQ resources she assigned the students to read were for the old format of the test, even though, buried on the College Board website, there were links to sample questions and answers for the new question format. (Note that none of what I have just mentioned relates to COVID-related changes to the test.) Finally, and perhaps most crucially, she never once gave any instructions or specific clear examples on how to get the points on the FRQs. DS always got perfect scores on the practice FRQs associated with each unit test (and no feedback) and yet when we realized how the FRQs are actually scored, we realized he was completely missing the boat. Given that they changed the 2020 AP exam to be all FRQs, I am sure DS would have gotten a 1 if he had not found and watched Andrew Conneen's YouTube videos and diligently practiced (in the last two weeks leading up to the test) writing FRQ responses that would get the points. (He ended up with a 5.) I have no explanation as to how she gets such high average scores, except that she is teaching a bunch of high-achieving, self-motivated kids who would do what they needed to do to get 4 and 5s no matter what. Also, your mileage may vary, but DS (and I) though the group embassy assignments were a huge waste of time. There. I've done it. Hopefully this feedback will help others be more aware of what they are signing up for.

To be perfectly honest, I have no experience (direct or indirect) with MIT edX. However, I can't imagine how they could take MIT problem sets and reformulate them such that the course can give corrections/feedback to 1000s of people without losing the rigor and depth. For example, proofs can usually be done in many different ways; I can't imagine how you could set things up so that 1000s of people can get helpful feedback on a proof. So do they just leave out any proofs? But again, I have no first-hand experience. BTW, I wrote more about our OCW experience (DS is also doing 14.01SC) on this thread

Someone else mentioned Stanford University-Level Online (ULO) for advanced math, and I'll throw in my two cents. DS did both terms of multivariable calculus last year and just finished the Heat & Light course. The MVC classes were definitely challenging, but not anything beyond what he could do. In contrast, the Heat & Light class was the first time that he had ever encountered an assignment where it was not immediately(or even 30 minutes later) obvious to him how to proceed; his SOP became tackling each problem for an hour to see how far he could get on the various parts and what questions he had, then he would attend class and ask all his questions, and then he would be able to finish the problems. The H&L instructor gave me the final stats on the class: Mean 81.8 (B+ - ULO grading scale is non-standard), std. dev. 7.11. Not an easy class at all. For comparison, multiple students finished with a 100 average in MVC. The MVC classes were graded on just two tests each; there were suggested problems to work out (and supplied solutions), but those were not turned in. There was a recommended pacing, but the only hard deadlines were the two tests; that's a lot of rope to hang yourself on if your student isn't disciplined. In contrast, H&L had 5 graded problem sets (with due dates) and two tests. DS thought the content videos for both were good; he liked the fact that he could pause them and try to work the problems out himself before seeing how the instructor did it. For both classes, the live sessions were more like office hours; the content presentation was in the pre-recorded videos. Be aware - you will need a ton of patience for dealing with ULO administratively. They only look at applications two or three weeks before each term starts, tests often don't get graded for 4-6 weeks, and emails can be black holes. They have 6 or 8 classes beyond MVC. Also - re MIT edx - You can also do actual the MIT classes (not ones reformulated for edx) using the materials at MIT OpenCourseWare. Look for "Scholar / SC" designated courses for ones that have a full set of lectures and all solutions. DS is doing 6.041SC right now and is really enjoying it.

DS is currently (as a senior) doing 6.041 SC (probability) and 14.01 SC (microeconomics). He wanted calculus-based versions of these classes, so he didn't want to do AP; we are spreading each class (taught at MIT as a semester class) over two semesters. The most important thing to know is that courses are given the "scholar" (SC) designation if they (supposedly) have videos and all solutions; all other classes have some subset of materials, but not the whole package. However, that being said, 14.01SC has had major content mismatches between lectures and problem sets and tests, which is surprising because it is all supposedly from the same semester. Overall, the format has worked very well for my very self-motivated student, and we have found the materials more than sufficient to be a complete course. The biggest problem has been for grading the 14.01 tests, because many questions have an "explain" component, and as a layperson, it is hard to know (even with DS's input) how "right" the explanations are. (I would have had the same issue with grading problem sets, but I base grades on tests only.) I have probably given him less credit than he would have gotten from an expert. Overall, DS has learned *a ton* and that's what's important to us. It is worth noting that I would have been less apt to use MIT OCW last year (as a junior) since he was planning to apply to an Ivy League and I wanted as many outside grades as possible for junior year. Also, we are somewhat resigned to him not being able to get credit for these at college, even though the content was way beyond AP.

I can't find a thread for general comments on online classes, so I'm going to put all of our experiences (good and bad) here. Derek Owens Honors Physics - great, but keep in mind it is asynchronous with almost no teacher interaction. Very math heavy. After this class, DS said PAH AP Physics C with JK was mostly review (except for the calculus bits). Highly recommend. Jack Kernion PAH AP Physics C (both parts in one year) - great teacher, good content and presentation, a TON of work that is relentless (many posts elsewhere echo this). Highly recommend. Connie Schwartz / Clover Valley Chemistry Honors Chemistry - great teacher, great content and presentation (really beyond excellent). Very math heavy. After this class DC said PAH AP Chem was mostly review. Some of her work is *really* challenging (esp. college-level lab report), but she was very willing to invest a lot in personal back and forth to bring about understanding and success. Highly recommend. Peter Moskaluk PAH AP Chemistry - great teacher, great content and presentation. DC took this 2019-2020, and when the College Board changed up the AP exam, Mr. Moskaluk went into overdrive and over the course of just 2 or 3 weeks re-did all his test prep materials to align to the revised test. Highly recommend. Susan Gilleran PAH BC Calculus - okay class, very little direct teacher interaction, all web-based using textbook-related website. Her posts on material could be 20 pages long; they were extremely wordy and conversational in tone, but DS is not big into reading (super math focused), so they were a slog. Often she came across rather negatively if she felt the class wasn't doing what they should. Also, DC was disappointed that usually the assigned problems were the simple ones, so he would do the harder problems for fun. Julia Reed PAH AP Comp Gov - to be fair, this has to be the hardest AP to teach by a mile because the content is always changing. She seems to be well-connected in Washington and extremely knowledgable. However, this course appeared to be frozen in 2014/2015 (DS took it 2019-2020). Many times there were recent relevant current events, but she had the kids read articles that were 5 years old (e.g., reading an article on the treatment of Navalny that was several years old when he had been in the headlines again in recent months). I could go on and on with examples. Also, she did nothing (zero) to prepare the kids for how to get points on the FRQs, and she didn't even seem to realize until after the class started that the College Board had reformulated the course and the test starting that year. In fact, even in April, her test prep materials (which the kids were assigned to read) were all for the old course formulation. DS got a 5, but only because he watched Andrew Conneen's YouTube videos, and Mr. Conneen was very clear about how to get the points. Stanford University-Level Online (ULO) Math Multivariable Calculus (Differential and Integral, one semester each) - Wanted a very high-level course on MV Calc (so not community college or random online college) and wanted an outside instructor for a rec letter (so not MIT OCW). Grade is entirely based on the two tests; problems to work out are suggested (and answers provided at the same time) but not turned in or corrected. This worked *great* for my very self-motivated kid, but might not work well for others. Be aware you will need patience on the administrative end. They didn't start looking at applications for fall start until the beginning of August, which was nail-biting for me because we didn't have a Plan B. Grades from exams often came out 4-6 weeks after the test. Emails could get responses immediately or in a week or never. DS seemed to learn a lot and really enjoyed it, but that was probably 99% his passion for math. Initial inquiries with one college indicate that getting credit for this class may not be straightforward since it isn't AP and it isn't an actual college class (it is run through Stanford OHS and credit comes from Stanford Continuing Studies). Stanford University-Level Online (ULO) Physics Light and Heat - this was the single most challenging class DS took in high school (including MIT OCW - see below), giving him his first experiences of reading through an assignment and really not having a clue how to attack it. But after tackling each problem for an hour, then interacting with the instructor over office hours, he got it all done. The tests were incredibly difficult, but good character building and preparation for the realities of college. Same issues with response times and grading times as the MV Calc class (but different instructor). MIT OpenCourseWare (OCW) 6.041SC (probability) and 14.01SC (microeconomics)- I'm throwing these in in case this info is helpful to anyone. DS did these senior year, when there was less need to have external validation for college applications. Also, he wanted calculus-based treatments of microeconomics and probability, which meant not AP stuff. The probability one (6.041) is better put together than the microeconomics one (14.01), indicating that not all scholar (SC) classes are created equal. For 14.01, some problems aren't included in the solutions, and there have been large chunks of mismatch between the content covered in the lectures and the content on the problem sets and tests (which is surprising, considering all the materials are supposed to come from the same semester). Also, not having an expert grader has been challenging for grading since many of the questions include a "explain" component, and it is hard to judge (as a layperson) how "right" his answers are. We probably gave him less credit than he would have gotten from an expert, but we didn't want to be overly generous. He is learning a ton, but it remains to be seen if he will be able to test for credit, or at least to place out of, the college equivalents.

My extremely self-motivated, very math-loving son took AP Physics C (both Mechanics and E&M in one year) with Jack Kernion through PAH in 2018-2019 and got 5s on both exams. I think that Mr. Kernion did a great job with the class, although it was a TON of work (we had to defer history to the summer to make enough space for the workload) and the work was absolutely relentless (e.g., 1st semester final was Dec 28, 2nd semester assignments start Jan 2). Mr. Kernion was extremely personable and friendly, a *really* nice guy. My son had taken Honors Physics through Derek Owens, and he felt like the physics content was mostly review, which allowed him to focus on the calculus parts (he was taking BC Calc concurrently). Don't bother with the free textbook; it is terrible, and the material that Mr. Kernion provides is more than enough. Overall, my son really liked the class, and Mr. Kernion, and it seemed like a great course in terms of content and presentation; I would highly recommend Mr. Kernion to anyone. (And another +1 for Connie Schwartz's Chemistry too.)

Hi all, I have been benefiting from these forums for years, but this is the first time I have ever been brave enough to start a topic. But I really need some current thoughts on the University Computer Science (USC) and Mathematical Logic classes from IMACS (Institute for Mathematics and Computer Science); the old threads I could find on these classes (not the EM classes) date from 2011. We would be doing the online versions. I have an extremely mathematically-inclined 9th grader (planning to take AP Calc BC next year, watches YouTube videos on calculus topics for fun), and I only recently stumbled across these classes. They seem like they might be good, but there are very pricey, and there is no way to preview them in depth without registering and then cancelling and forfeiting $100. And I can find very little in the way of independent reviews of the courses. My son has already taken the aptitude test and he got very positive feedback. and an invitation to start either sequence. My problem is that I already have his schedule for the next three years planned out, and doing these classes would probably mean bumping something else. If they are really good, I would do it in a heartbeat, but I'm hesitate to start down their paths without more independent feedback from recent users. So I would really appreciate any feedback anyone can give me on either of these sequences. Any thoughts would be welcome, but as a starting point: Are they well-designed and well-run? Do you feel that the classes gave your student a much deeper understanding (or a very different type of understanding) than a typical computer or math course? Do you feel that the classes gave your student a much better foundation for college math or computer classes? And while I know every student is different, about how much time (total hours or hours per week and how long it took to finish) did the classes take for your student to complete? And has anyone had a student make it through the Set Theory class and onto their "extraordinarily advanced courses"? Thanks in advance for your thoughts!