Academic rigor in American high schools is defined by the Advanced Placement curriculum. These courses are objective, measurable, and recognizable throughout higher education in America. However, in contrast to the accountable and professional approach embodied in the AP curriculum, Loomis Chaffee’s College Level courses, otherwise known as CL courses, center around a new approach: autonomy in learning, thinking, and dialogue. Instead of determining academic rigor in terms of the quantity of material covered or the intensity of an exam, Loomis argues that it should be judged by the depth of ideas explored and the degree of intellectual curiosity inspired beyond the textbook. So which framework works better for Loomis?
On the one hand, AP courses give students structure, consistency, and achievable outcomes. Standardized tests allow colleges to know that students taking them have been exposed to the same material, which is essential to higher education institutions when comparing applicants. According to the College Board, more than 1.2 million students take at least one AP exam each year, providing colleges with an accurate indicator of preparation and knowledge. Moreover, in addition to rewarding achievement, taking AP courses is one way to earn college credit, which is very useful for students when entering college.
On the other hand, the case for CLs (College Level) courses is meant to mimic the level and pace of typical college seminars, not just test prep. Without the looming threat of a national exam, CL students can study topics in greater depth, connect ideas across subjects, and participate in discussions similar to those in college courses. Educators can also modify their curriculum to align with their students’ interests, further personalizing the classroom environment.
In my opinion, the curriculum that fits Loomis best should align with its mission of “the best self and common good.” Academic rigor should not be reduced to simply learning more material or covering more in a syllabus. The issue with AP classes is that they often reflect a college admissions culture focused on external validation, something Loomis aims to move beyond through its College Level courses. AP exam courses also often “teach to the test,” which suppresses creativity and risk-taking. However, CL classes, in their encouragement of dialogue and original ideas, come much closer to what Loomis states is the function of his own educational mission.
In conclusion, though both AP and CL courses offer different routes to academic rigor, their value also depends on what we think the purpose of education is. If we define rigor in terms of efficiency and achievement, then the AP system works. However, if we define rigor in terms of curiosity, analysis, and having the courage to be original, which are values Loomis embodies, then the CL framework best represents the mission.
