There are studies in the literature that suggest that students who take AP courses are no better equipped for university success than students who do not. As reported at the 2006 AAAS Annual meeting “Our survey, the largest ever of its type, suggests that AP courses do not contribute substantially to student success in college,” said Philip M. Sadler, Director of Science Education at the Harvard University-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and a Senior Lecturer in Astronomy at Harvard (2). Other reports cite similar uncertainties as to the effectiveness of AP classes (3). There are papers that state exactly the opposite (4). The fact that there is such a disparity in the evaluation of the data at hand suggests that more research needs to be done in order to accurately assess whether AP courses are indeed in the best interests of students and education.

Also of concern is the economic impact that will inevitably accompany the decision to increase access to AP classes. The proposal mentioned training of teachers, but there was no mention of equipping classrooms to perform the required AP labs or purchasing the textbooks to support the curriculum. Putting together a class set of lab experiments from scratch appears to cost around $500–700 depending on the vendor, and some of these costs will recur as consumables are used. Textbooks would require an expenditure of approximately $1900 for a class set. Where will the funding come from for these initial start-up and recurring costs? More significantly, where will school districts obtain the money to pay the teachers to teach these classes every year? Teaching a new AP course necessarily means that someone else will have to teach the already existing courses as the AP class would only attract students who have finished the prerequisite courses. School districts nationwide have seen their budgets eroded to the point of having to freeze or reduce course offerings and cut back on extracurricular activities. Where will the funding come from to actually increase the number of teachers in our high schools so that we can offer AP courses?

There are also equity issues to consider. Which schools should get the AP training? Would it be the schools that already have a strong curriculum in math and science? For without the appropriate prerequisite courses, an AP course is of questionable value. Following this logic would lead to the existing well-funded schools becoming better and the other schools dropping farther behind, which is certainly not desirable nor is it the stated intention of the proposal.

I personally know high school chemistry and other science teachers who have had implementation of AP courses dictated to them by their school boards, which made the decision to start offering the classes based on pressure from parents in their district and against the recommendations of the science departments themselves. These districts already have shrinking budgets due to declining enrollments.

Increasing access to rigorous, well-taught, inquiry-based science and mathematics classes is a laudable goal and one that I believe we all support. However, I feel there are many unanswered questions surrounding the proposal that expanding the number of AP classes in high school is the best way to achieve that goal. Is it truly in our best interest to spend significant time and resources to train teachers in an effort that cannot be supported financially by their own school districts and is of uncertain effectiveness in terms of preparing our students for the future?

Literature Cited

1. Moore, J. W. J. Chem. Educ. 2006, 83, 519.
2. Bradt, S. High School AP Courses do not Predict College Success in Science. 2006. Available online (accessed March 2006).
3. Geiser S.; Santelices V. The Role of Advanced Placement and Honors Courses in College Admissions. 2004. Center for Studies in Higher Education. Paper CSHE-4-04. Available online (accessed March 2006).
4. Hansen, A. Success in Advanced Placement Courses. 2005. PDF version available online (accessed March 2006).