Tell High School Students to Stop Contacting Professors

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am horrified by this and would never allow it as a parent. But you are a business professor: they want something from you.

On the other hand, sometimes professors in severely undersubscribed areas are really the ones who should be wanting something from the student. After all, some humanities departments are dying on the vine.

For that reason, I did allow/encourage DC to write two very brief emails: one to a professor in a niche humanities major at a top 10 SLAC, and one to a professor in the same field at a very large but prestigious oos state flagship.

To my great surprise, the large school professor answered; he was lovely and informative. The SLAC professor did not.

Guess where kid did not apply?

The SLAC professor was probably conserving her time for the students who contribute to her salary and for whose learning she is responsible.

The idea that faculty have a duty to respond to unsolicited junk mail is nuts. The idea that mentoring high school students would be cost effective for anyone who is doing PhD level humanities or social science research is also nuts. (I have no lab experience. Though I think the value added of a high school student to a lab would be negative, perhaps there are some low level repetitive-but-not-critical tasks that a young student could be made responsible for.)

One reason Lumiere and the other pay-to-play research experience services cost so much is that they have to pay (very junior PhD and postdoc level) people to mentor them.

No mentoring or research was asked for. Just questions about studying there to decide whether to apply ED. You can disagree on whether the SLAC professor was kind of a jerk, but it is a very bad look for SLACs trying to sell themselves on intimate interaction with students. And it is against the prof's self-interest when the department is only producing a few majors a year...and basically has almost no students "for whose learning she is responsible."

You have no idea how many junk emails a particular professor gets per week. If you're on DCUM you know that many many applicants apply for niche subjects with the plan to switch to econ freshman year.

SLACs have whole departments tasked with responding to queries from high school students. It's not the role of teaching faculty to do so.

You apparently don't know any professors in niche humanities majors at SLACs -- or seem to have much familiarity with SLACs at all.

You also have a very interesting take, namely, that a professor at a dying humanities department with 2-3 majors a year should not make an "email's worth of effort" to secure enrollment of a potential major the following year. If you are the "OP business prof," might I suggest you get to know your colleagues in marketing better?

As for the "role of teaching faculty" (a redundant phrase in discussing SLACs), it is, to be sure, not part of their job description. But that means, in the long run, they are in danger of not having jobs.

I was not the OP.

For SLACs, niche departments are service departments. Anthropology and comparative literature professors often teach, for the most part, non-majors who are fulfilling distribution requirements. Some may lament the lack of serious students committed to their discipline; others may think such students take more time and energy than the average.

A big rebound in, for example, the number of art history or German majors is highly unlikely, even if professors in those departments start responding to emails from random high school students.

That’s really the point: this thread is about contacting professors. I gave an example where a high school student contacting one, before committing to, say, ED is not only appropriate but wise (for an actual humanities kid who will not change majors). If a SLAC professor thinks “having such students take(s) more time and energy” than it’s worth, and does not deign to respond to an email, then that’s something the kid really needs to know — all the more so because it is a SLAC. If a professor is the opposite and is psyched to have any kid expressing real, demonstrated interest in an e-mail (unusual, as you are apparently unaware), that’s great information to have as well. I guess you disagree.

Your point that a humanities rebound is not likely is certainly a profound one. But if a professor can increase their majors by 50% every year or so (even from 2 to 3) by answering a few emails, it is highly advisable that they do so, lest they more rapidly lose yet another tenure track “line” in their department or, worse, have their department permanently “consolidated.”

The 16 yr old high schooler doesn’t have “real demonstrated interest” in some boring college research. They are simply trying to check what is perceived as a prestigious box for their college application so they can get into an “elite” school and feel worthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm an academic at a research organization (not a university) and I totally agree with the OP. But I'd go a step further: I also get emails all the time from undergrad students whose professors require them to do some kind of interview or mock policy exercise involving outside experts. I understand the desire to help students get real-world experience, but I don't have endless extra time to help teach someone else's class.

So it's either brown-nosing for college admissions (and the counselors paid $$ telling them to do this need to stop) or it's feckless HS teachers assigning students an "impossible task" and PARENTS need to tell them to stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am horrified by this and would never allow it as a parent. But you are a business professor: they want something from you.

On the other hand, sometimes professors in severely undersubscribed areas are really the ones who should be wanting something from the student. After all, some humanities departments are dying on the vine.

For that reason, I did allow/encourage DC to write two very brief emails: one to a professor in a niche humanities major at a top 10 SLAC, and one to a professor in the same field at a very large but prestigious oos state flagship.

To my great surprise, the large school professor answered; he was lovely and informative. The SLAC professor did not.

Guess where kid did not apply?

The SLAC professor was probably conserving her time for the students who contribute to her salary and for whose learning she is responsible.

The idea that faculty have a duty to respond to unsolicited junk mail is nuts. The idea that mentoring high school students would be cost effective for anyone who is doing PhD level humanities or social science research is also nuts. (I have no lab experience. Though I think the value added of a high school student to a lab would be negative, perhaps there are some low level repetitive-but-not-critical tasks that a young student could be made responsible for.)

One reason Lumiere and the other pay-to-play research experience services cost so much is that they have to pay (very junior PhD and postdoc level) people to mentor them.

No mentoring or research was asked for. Just questions about studying there to decide whether to apply ED. You can disagree on whether the SLAC professor was kind of a jerk, but it is a very bad look for SLACs trying to sell themselves on intimate interaction with students. And it is against the prof's self-interest when the department is only producing a few majors a year...and basically has almost no students "for whose learning she is responsible."

You have no idea how many junk emails a particular professor gets per week. If you're on DCUM you know that many many applicants apply for niche subjects with the plan to switch to econ freshman year.

SLACs have whole departments tasked with responding to queries from high school students. It's not the role of teaching faculty to do so.

You apparently don't know any professors in niche humanities majors at SLACs -- or seem to have much familiarity with SLACs at all.

You also have a very interesting take, namely, that a professor at a dying humanities department with 2-3 majors a year should not make an "email's worth of effort" to secure enrollment of a potential major the following year. If you are the "OP business prof," might I suggest you get to know your colleagues in marketing better?

As for the "role of teaching faculty" (a redundant phrase in discussing SLACs), it is, to be sure, not part of their job description. But that means, in the long run, they are in danger of not having jobs.

I was not the OP.

For SLACs, niche departments are service departments. Anthropology and comparative literature professors often teach, for the most part, non-majors who are fulfilling distribution requirements. Some may lament the lack of serious students committed to their discipline; others may think such students take more time and energy than the average.

A big rebound in, for example, the number of art history or German majors is highly unlikely, even if professors in those departments start responding to emails from random high school students.

That’s really the point: this thread is about contacting professors. I gave an example where a high school student contacting one, before committing to, say, ED is not only appropriate but wise (for an actual humanities kid who will not change majors). If a SLAC professor thinks “having such students take(s) more time and energy” than it’s worth, and does not deign to respond to an email, then that’s something the kid really needs to know — all the more so because it is a SLAC. If a professor is the opposite and is psyched to have any kid expressing real, demonstrated interest in an e-mail (unusual, as you are apparently unaware), that’s great information to have as well. I guess you disagree.

Your point that a humanities rebound is not likely is certainly a profound one. But if a professor can increase their majors by 50% every year or so (even from 2 to 3) by answering a few emails, it is highly advisable that they do so, lest they more rapidly lose yet another tenure track “line” in their department or, worse, have their department permanently “consolidated.”

The 16 yr old high schooler doesn’t have “real demonstrated interest” in some boring college research. They are simply trying to check what is perceived as a prestigious box for their college application so they can get into an “elite” school and feel worthy.

Because their parents, college counselor/consultant, and the colleges admissions department tell them that’s the way to get admitted. If you think they actually want to do this, your nuts. Don’t blame the player; blame the adults who have made up and make so much money from the game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an academic at a research organization (not a university) and I totally agree with the OP. But I'd go a step further: I also get emails all the time from undergrad students whose professors require them to do some kind of interview or mock policy exercise involving outside experts. I understand the desire to help students get real-world experience, but I don't have endless extra time to help teach someone else's class.

So it's either brown-nosing for college admissions (and the counselors paid $$ telling them to do this need to stop) or it's feckless HS teachers assigning students an "impossible task" and PARENTS need to tell them to stop.

mandatory service hours are already one step too far in HS. Mandatory "research" or hobnobbing with policy experts is right over the top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As business professor, I get tons of annoying emails from students wanting "research internships" or "mentorship". Some are graduate students, some are undergrads, and some are in high school. Some are in my county, some are in my state. Some are in India or Bangladesh.

"Dear Professor X, I am a junior at XYZ high school and am greatly impressed by your paper "" [published before this kid was born]. I would like to study under you."

One elementary school girl from across the country asked for a free sweatshirt. Obviously her teacher told her to do this. One private high school student bragged that he founded and ran a charitable investment fund. The assets under management were less than one year of tuition. Some college counselors must be telling them to get lines on their resumes. One stranger sent his resume and asked for a letter of recommendation.

This is all an annoying waste of time. I mostly teach graduate students, never lower-level undergrads. High schools don't even offer courses in my subject. Who is telling students to do this?

And you should not mostly be teaching grad students. I would fire you if you did not have tenure.

Is "no prof should be mostly teaching grad students" one of the next-gen prof-bashing memes? Asking for a friend...

Yes. Some people here believe life begins and ends at undergrad.

Before my oldest began his college apps this year, the only general advice I believed true about the process was: It doesn't matter where you do undergrad; it only matters where you do grad school. This advice encapsulated my own experience (undistinguished but free undergrad, elite door-opening grad) and seemed pretty savvy from a financial angle: elite undergrad super-expensive, elite grad entirely free (with TAship or other source of widely available funding).

Then I discovered DCUM, where this advice is more or less flipped on its head: for the people who post here, the only thing that matters is where you go or went to undergrad. What a weird fetish!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am horrified by this and would never allow it as a parent. But you are a business professor: they want something from you.

On the other hand, sometimes professors in severely undersubscribed areas are really the ones who should be wanting something from the student. After all, some humanities departments are dying on the vine.

For that reason, I did allow/encourage DC to write two very brief emails: one to a professor in a niche humanities major at a top 10 SLAC, and one to a professor in the same field at a very large but prestigious oos state flagship.

To my great surprise, the large school professor answered; he was lovely and informative. The SLAC professor did not.

Guess where kid did not apply?

The SLAC professor was probably conserving her time for the students who contribute to her salary and for whose learning she is responsible.

The idea that faculty have a duty to respond to unsolicited junk mail is nuts. The idea that mentoring high school students would be cost effective for anyone who is doing PhD level humanities or social science research is also nuts. (I have no lab experience. Though I think the value added of a high school student to a lab would be negative, perhaps there are some low level repetitive-but-not-critical tasks that a young student could be made responsible for.)

One reason Lumiere and the other pay-to-play research experience services cost so much is that they have to pay (very junior PhD and postdoc level) people to mentor them.

No mentoring or research was asked for. Just questions about studying there to decide whether to apply ED. You can disagree on whether the SLAC professor was kind of a jerk, but it is a very bad look for SLACs trying to sell themselves on intimate interaction with students. And it is against the prof's self-interest when the department is only producing a few majors a year...and basically has almost no students "for whose learning she is responsible."

You have no idea how many junk emails a particular professor gets per week. If you're on DCUM you know that many many applicants apply for niche subjects with the plan to switch to econ freshman year.

SLACs have whole departments tasked with responding to queries from high school students. It's not the role of teaching faculty to do so.

You apparently don't know any professors in niche humanities majors at SLACs -- or seem to have much familiarity with SLACs at all.

You also have a very interesting take, namely, that a professor at a dying humanities department with 2-3 majors a year should not make an "email's worth of effort" to secure enrollment of a potential major the following year. If you are the "OP business prof," might I suggest you get to know your colleagues in marketing better?

As for the "role of teaching faculty" (a redundant phrase in discussing SLACs), it is, to be sure, not part of their job description. But that means, in the long run, they are in danger of not having jobs.

I was not the OP.

For SLACs, niche departments are service departments. Anthropology and comparative literature professors often teach, for the most part, non-majors who are fulfilling distribution requirements. Some may lament the lack of serious students committed to their discipline; others may think such students take more time and energy than the average.

A big rebound in, for example, the number of art history or German majors is highly unlikely, even if professors in those departments start responding to emails from random high school students.

That’s really the point: this thread is about contacting professors. I gave an example where a high school student contacting one, before committing to, say, ED is not only appropriate but wise (for an actual humanities kid who will not change majors). If a SLAC professor thinks “having such students take(s) more time and energy” than it’s worth, and does not deign to respond to an email, then that’s something the kid really needs to know — all the more so because it is a SLAC. If a professor is the opposite and is psyched to have any kid expressing real, demonstrated interest in an e-mail (unusual, as you are apparently unaware), that’s great information to have as well. I guess you disagree.

Your point that a humanities rebound is not likely is certainly a profound one. But if a professor can increase their majors by 50% every year or so (even from 2 to 3) by answering a few emails, it is highly advisable that they do so, lest they more rapidly lose yet another tenure track “line” in their department or, worse, have their department permanently “consolidated.”

But it’s not teal interest; it’s demonstrated interest for the purposes of playing the admissions game.

Exactly. Lots of schemers in the admissions game. You say your kid is authentic but how would that be apparent in an email? Why is it the professor's job to judge student's sincerity?

As PP mentioned, if a HS student is genuinely interested in a specific area of research/study, why not spend time reading the relevant literature and familiarizing him/herself with important current work in their filed. Why not read a few journals with a high impact factor? Emailing scholars seems more about making "connections" than learning.

Yup. Students are of course already doing that - reading scientific research and journals. But now that's not enough. Applications for competitive high school research programs, governor's school, etc ask students to describe their specific skills and experience in labs, research, and programming.

The broader point is that, for talented high school students with no connections, there are often limited opportunities to develop sought-after skills. So instead of having institutional support (by either high schools or universities), these kids are trying to figure out things on their own which is stupid and inefficient (and apparently annoying to a lot of people). While I agree that it all seems silly and premature, that is the reality. I also think it's weird that our entire public school system is encouraging smart students to load up on supposed college-level work (APs) beginning Freshman year. But we have created a rigor race. Instead of creating a broader and deeper pipeline of opportunities for students, we are increasingly creating a Hunger Games dynamic where students are fighting over the ever-shrinking number of opportunities.

While I realize this isn't a problem for an individual professor to solve, I think it's important for professors to understand the frictions students face and perhaps have more empathy for students instead of assuming entitlement.

I hear you. I think parents can also do their bit to discourage kids from trying to do it all. I really did that with my kid. People thought I was crazy. Kid got into Harvard. I guess it doesn’t take all that.

I'm glad that things worked out for your family. You are right that balance is important. My kid has the intellectual curiosity, intelligence and stats for ivy and does indeed wonk out over scientific journals (doesn't understand all and often focuses on abstracts) in subjects of interest. DC applied to a few competitive programs but opted out of the cold calling thing, particularly in light of the current political funding drama facing universities. Likely not applying to ivy. We are focusing on fit over prestige. If the programs don't work out or are cancelled, DC will do a regular summer job. We aren't doing pay to play research, even if that reduces DC's chances for reach schools.

Still, it is so frustrating how inefficient our educational system is developing talent. It reminds me of the absurdity of the pay to play travel sports model.

In what way is our educational system failing your child? In what way will working at the pool this summer undermine his developing talent?

Your kid sounds like he's thriving and will continue to thrive, regardless of he does this summer or where he goes to college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm an academic at a research organization (not a university) and I totally agree with the OP. But I'd go a step further: I also get emails all the time from undergrad students whose professors require them to do some kind of interview or mock policy exercise involving outside experts. I understand the desire to help students get real-world experience, but I don't have endless extra time to help teach someone else's class.

So it's either brown-nosing for college admissions (and the counselors paid $$ telling them to do this need to stop) or it's feckless HS teachers assigning students an "impossible task" and PARENTS need to tell them to stop.

No. You have things backwards. The core issue is that educational institutional priorities are really screwed up. Advisory support and development of undergraduates is often haphazard and political at a lot of schools that excel at raising $, marketing themselves, building pretty buildings, and generating high-profile research. As PP profs have acknowledged, there is a real reluctance for professors to want to train younger students.

High schools are chronically mismanaged, with a lot of administrative bloat and underpaid teachers. There is no intrinsic incentive to develop students beyond what is in someone's "contract". Furthermore, there is often poor alignment academically with curricula and modern jobs.

Admissions is just an inefficient mess, with huge energy input and relatively low yields, even at top schools.

As a result, a huge industry of college consultants and pay-to-play college programs and research packaging shops has exploded. $$$ is driving all of it.

Parents can certainly opt out of the madness to a degree. But the problems are real and are not the parents' fault. The educational system is eroding. Instead of focusing on growing opportunities and mentorship for students, services and support are often getting cut. Students are effectively being abandoned by the adults.

And then we wonder why everyone is stressed out and parents feel pressure to pay for all this nonsense? Give me a break.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am horrified by this and would never allow it as a parent. But you are a business professor: they want something from you.

On the other hand, sometimes professors in severely undersubscribed areas are really the ones who should be wanting something from the student. After all, some humanities departments are dying on the vine.

For that reason, I did allow/encourage DC to write two very brief emails: one to a professor in a niche humanities major at a top 10 SLAC, and one to a professor in the same field at a very large but prestigious oos state flagship.

To my great surprise, the large school professor answered; he was lovely and informative. The SLAC professor did not.

Guess where kid did not apply?

The SLAC professor was probably conserving her time for the students who contribute to her salary and for whose learning she is responsible.

The idea that faculty have a duty to respond to unsolicited junk mail is nuts. The idea that mentoring high school students would be cost effective for anyone who is doing PhD level humanities or social science research is also nuts. (I have no lab experience. Though I think the value added of a high school student to a lab would be negative, perhaps there are some low level repetitive-but-not-critical tasks that a young student could be made responsible for.)

One reason Lumiere and the other pay-to-play research experience services cost so much is that they have to pay (very junior PhD and postdoc level) people to mentor them.

No mentoring or research was asked for. Just questions about studying there to decide whether to apply ED. You can disagree on whether the SLAC professor was kind of a jerk, but it is a very bad look for SLACs trying to sell themselves on intimate interaction with students. And it is against the prof's self-interest when the department is only producing a few majors a year...and basically has almost no students "for whose learning she is responsible."

You have no idea how many junk emails a particular professor gets per week. If you're on DCUM you know that many many applicants apply for niche subjects with the plan to switch to econ freshman year.

SLACs have whole departments tasked with responding to queries from high school students. It's not the role of teaching faculty to do so.

You apparently don't know any professors in niche humanities majors at SLACs -- or seem to have much familiarity with SLACs at all.

You also have a very interesting take, namely, that a professor at a dying humanities department with 2-3 majors a year should not make an "email's worth of effort" to secure enrollment of a potential major the following year. If you are the "OP business prof," might I suggest you get to know your colleagues in marketing better?

As for the "role of teaching faculty" (a redundant phrase in discussing SLACs), it is, to be sure, not part of their job description. But that means, in the long run, they are in danger of not having jobs.

I was not the OP.

For SLACs, niche departments are service departments. Anthropology and comparative literature professors often teach, for the most part, non-majors who are fulfilling distribution requirements. Some may lament the lack of serious students committed to their discipline; others may think such students take more time and energy than the average.

A big rebound in, for example, the number of art history or German majors is highly unlikely, even if professors in those departments start responding to emails from random high school students.

That’s really the point: this thread is about contacting professors. I gave an example where a high school student contacting one, before committing to, say, ED is not only appropriate but wise (for an actual humanities kid who will not change majors). If a SLAC professor thinks “having such students take(s) more time and energy” than it’s worth, and does not deign to respond to an email, then that’s something the kid really needs to know — all the more so because it is a SLAC. If a professor is the opposite and is psyched to have any kid expressing real, demonstrated interest in an e-mail (unusual, as you are apparently unaware), that’s great information to have as well. I guess you disagree.

Your point that a humanities rebound is not likely is certainly a profound one. But if a professor can increase their majors by 50% every year or so (even from 2 to 3) by answering a few emails, it is highly advisable that they do so, lest they more rapidly lose yet another tenure track “line” in their department or, worse, have their department permanently “consolidated.”

The 16 yr old high schooler doesn’t have “real demonstrated interest” in some boring college research. They are simply trying to check what is perceived as a prestigious box for their college application so they can get into an “elite” school and feel worthy.

If you actually read these posts, the example you are referring to has nothing to do with research and mentoring. Rather, DC was probably applying ED (in only a few weeks) to a SLAC niche humanities department, and wrote a prof. to get a better sense of what it is like majoring in the department (majors yearly could be counted on one hand) before pulling the ED application trigger -- and got no response. Suffice to say, no application was submitted. I am so glad the letter was written before committing, because a similar email was warmly received by a prof at a huge research flagship. Of course an application was submitted there.

There you have it folks, a good reason for a high school kid to contact a professor -- contrary to the thread title.

A high school kid contacting a prof to ask for mentoring and research, on the other hand, is indeed a horrible thing. There is a difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid didn't do it, but College Essay Guy recommended emailing a professor. The idea was if you get a response back and engage in a conversation, your "why us" essay can be more specific.

"I have spoken with Dr Larla and am really looking forward to taking their Obsessive Parenting class."

College essay guy is one of those consultants we are talking about. He makes money from telling kids what to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am horrified by this and would never allow it as a parent. But you are a business professor: they want something from you.

On the other hand, sometimes professors in severely undersubscribed areas are really the ones who should be wanting something from the student. After all, some humanities departments are dying on the vine.

For that reason, I did allow/encourage DC to write two very brief emails: one to a professor in a niche humanities major at a top 10 SLAC, and one to a professor in the same field at a very large but prestigious oos state flagship.

To my great surprise, the large school professor answered; he was lovely and informative. The SLAC professor did not.

Guess where kid did not apply?

The SLAC professor was probably conserving her time for the students who contribute to her salary and for whose learning she is responsible.

The idea that faculty have a duty to respond to unsolicited junk mail is nuts. The idea that mentoring high school students would be cost effective for anyone who is doing PhD level humanities or social science research is also nuts. (I have no lab experience. Though I think the value added of a high school student to a lab would be negative, perhaps there are some low level repetitive-but-not-critical tasks that a young student could be made responsible for.)

One reason Lumiere and the other pay-to-play research experience services cost so much is that they have to pay (very junior PhD and postdoc level) people to mentor them.

No mentoring or research was asked for. Just questions about studying there to decide whether to apply ED. You can disagree on whether the SLAC professor was kind of a jerk, but it is a very bad look for SLACs trying to sell themselves on intimate interaction with students. And it is against the prof's self-interest when the department is only producing a few majors a year...and basically has almost no students "for whose learning she is responsible."

You have no idea how many junk emails a particular professor gets per week. If you're on DCUM you know that many many applicants apply for niche subjects with the plan to switch to econ freshman year.

SLACs have whole departments tasked with responding to queries from high school students. It's not the role of teaching faculty to do so.

You apparently don't know any professors in niche humanities majors at SLACs -- or seem to have much familiarity with SLACs at all.

You also have a very interesting take, namely, that a professor at a dying humanities department with 2-3 majors a year should not make an "email's worth of effort" to secure enrollment of a potential major the following year. If you are the "OP business prof," might I suggest you get to know your colleagues in marketing better?

As for the "role of teaching faculty" (a redundant phrase in discussing SLACs), it is, to be sure, not part of their job description. But that means, in the long run, they are in danger of not having jobs.

I was not the OP.

For SLACs, niche departments are service departments. Anthropology and comparative literature professors often teach, for the most part, non-majors who are fulfilling distribution requirements. Some may lament the lack of serious students committed to their discipline; others may think such students take more time and energy than the average.

A big rebound in, for example, the number of art history or German majors is highly unlikely, even if professors in those departments start responding to emails from random high school students.

That’s really the point: this thread is about contacting professors. I gave an example where a high school student contacting one, before committing to, say, ED is not only appropriate but wise (for an actual humanities kid who will not change majors). If a SLAC professor thinks “having such students take(s) more time and energy” than it’s worth, and does not deign to respond to an email, then that’s something the kid really needs to know — all the more so because it is a SLAC. If a professor is the opposite and is psyched to have any kid expressing real, demonstrated interest in an e-mail (unusual, as you are apparently unaware), that’s great information to have as well. I guess you disagree.

Your point that a humanities rebound is not likely is certainly a profound one. But if a professor can increase their majors by 50% every year or so (even from 2 to 3) by answering a few emails, it is highly advisable that they do so, lest they more rapidly lose yet another tenure track “line” in their department or, worse, have their department permanently “consolidated.”

The 16 yr old high schooler doesn’t have “real demonstrated interest” in some boring college research. They are simply trying to check what is perceived as a prestigious box for their college application so they can get into an “elite” school and feel worthy.

If you actually read these posts, the example you are referring to has nothing to do with research and mentoring. Rather, DC was probably applying ED (in only a few weeks) to a SLAC niche humanities department, and wrote a prof. to get a better sense of what it is like majoring in the department (majors yearly could be counted on one hand) before pulling the ED application trigger -- and got no response. Suffice to say, no application was submitted. I am so glad the letter was written before committing, because a similar email was warmly received by a prof at a huge research flagship. Of course an application was submitted there.

There you have it folks, a good reason for a high school kid to contact a professor -- contrary to the thread title.

A high school kid contacting a prof to ask for mentoring and research, on the other hand, is indeed a horrible thing. There is a difference.

That’s still not the role of a professor. What if everyone wrote professors asking about the major?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am horrified by this and would never allow it as a parent. But you are a business professor: they want something from you.

On the other hand, sometimes professors in severely undersubscribed areas are really the ones who should be wanting something from the student. After all, some humanities departments are dying on the vine.

For that reason, I did allow/encourage DC to write two very brief emails: one to a professor in a niche humanities major at a top 10 SLAC, and one to a professor in the same field at a very large but prestigious oos state flagship.

To my great surprise, the large school professor answered; he was lovely and informative. The SLAC professor did not.

Guess where kid did not apply?

The SLAC professor was probably conserving her time for the students who contribute to her salary and for whose learning she is responsible.

The idea that faculty have a duty to respond to unsolicited junk mail is nuts. The idea that mentoring high school students would be cost effective for anyone who is doing PhD level humanities or social science research is also nuts. (I have no lab experience. Though I think the value added of a high school student to a lab would be negative, perhaps there are some low level repetitive-but-not-critical tasks that a young student could be made responsible for.)

One reason Lumiere and the other pay-to-play research experience services cost so much is that they have to pay (very junior PhD and postdoc level) people to mentor them.

No mentoring or research was asked for. Just questions about studying there to decide whether to apply ED. You can disagree on whether the SLAC professor was kind of a jerk, but it is a very bad look for SLACs trying to sell themselves on intimate interaction with students. And it is against the prof's self-interest when the department is only producing a few majors a year...and basically has almost no students "for whose learning she is responsible."

You have no idea how many junk emails a particular professor gets per week. If you're on DCUM you know that many many applicants apply for niche subjects with the plan to switch to econ freshman year.

SLACs have whole departments tasked with responding to queries from high school students. It's not the role of teaching faculty to do so.

You apparently don't know any professors in niche humanities majors at SLACs -- or seem to have much familiarity with SLACs at all.

You also have a very interesting take, namely, that a professor at a dying humanities department with 2-3 majors a year should not make an "email's worth of effort" to secure enrollment of a potential major the following year. If you are the "OP business prof," might I suggest you get to know your colleagues in marketing better?

As for the "role of teaching faculty" (a redundant phrase in discussing SLACs), it is, to be sure, not part of their job description. But that means, in the long run, they are in danger of not having jobs.

I was not the OP.

For SLACs, niche departments are service departments. Anthropology and comparative literature professors often teach, for the most part, non-majors who are fulfilling distribution requirements. Some may lament the lack of serious students committed to their discipline; others may think such students take more time and energy than the average.

A big rebound in, for example, the number of art history or German majors is highly unlikely, even if professors in those departments start responding to emails from random high school students.

That’s really the point: this thread is about contacting professors. I gave an example where a high school student contacting one, before committing to, say, ED is not only appropriate but wise (for an actual humanities kid who will not change majors). If a SLAC professor thinks “having such students take(s) more time and energy” than it’s worth, and does not deign to respond to an email, then that’s something the kid really needs to know — all the more so because it is a SLAC. If a professor is the opposite and is psyched to have any kid expressing real, demonstrated interest in an e-mail (unusual, as you are apparently unaware), that’s great information to have as well. I guess you disagree.

Your point that a humanities rebound is not likely is certainly a profound one. But if a professor can increase their majors by 50% every year or so (even from 2 to 3) by answering a few emails, it is highly advisable that they do so, lest they more rapidly lose yet another tenure track “line” in their department or, worse, have their department permanently “consolidated.”

The 16 yr old high schooler doesn’t have “real demonstrated interest” in some boring college research. They are simply trying to check what is perceived as a prestigious box for their college application so they can get into an “elite” school and feel worthy.

If you actually read these posts, the example you are referring to has nothing to do with research and mentoring. Rather, DC was probably applying ED (in only a few weeks) to a SLAC niche humanities department, and wrote a prof. to get a better sense of what it is like majoring in the department (majors yearly could be counted on one hand) before pulling the ED application trigger -- and got no response. Suffice to say, no application was submitted. I am so glad the letter was written before committing, because a similar email was warmly received by a prof at a huge research flagship. Of course an application was submitted there.

There you have it folks, a good reason for a high school kid to contact a professor -- contrary to the thread title.

A high school kid contacting a prof to ask for mentoring and research, on the other hand, is indeed a horrible thing. There is a difference.

That’s still not the role of a professor. What if everyone wrote professors asking about the major?

The kid got valuable information: go to a niche department where a prof is going to go beyond the call of duty (and there are many), or go to one (a SLAC no less; you detractors seem clueless about what profs have to do at SLACs) where one thinks, "This is not my role." Valuable information for the kid to have. Are you seriously arguing kid should not have obtained this valuable info? Er, OK.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s kinda obnoxious for HS kids to think they should get a job doing research.

The professor has a slew of graduate students at his fingertips to help with research. Why would someone think he would ask a kid in HS to help with research?Tell me why. Let me real here.

Go get a job at the mall and leave this professor alone.

+1

It’s insulting. No 17 year old can be helpful to them without a lot of work and handholding. Why does anyone feel entitled to their time?

These are probably the same people who moan about faculty kid acceptances. It’s right in line with the complete disrespect they have for the profession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am horrified by this and would never allow it as a parent. But you are a business professor: they want something from you.

On the other hand, sometimes professors in severely undersubscribed areas are really the ones who should be wanting something from the student. After all, some humanities departments are dying on the vine.

For that reason, I did allow/encourage DC to write two very brief emails: one to a professor in a niche humanities major at a top 10 SLAC, and one to a professor in the same field at a very large but prestigious oos state flagship.

To my great surprise, the large school professor answered; he was lovely and informative. The SLAC professor did not.

Guess where kid did not apply?

The SLAC professor was probably conserving her time for the students who contribute to her salary and for whose learning she is responsible.

The idea that faculty have a duty to respond to unsolicited junk mail is nuts. The idea that mentoring high school students would be cost effective for anyone who is doing PhD level humanities or social science research is also nuts. (I have no lab experience. Though I think the value added of a high school student to a lab would be negative, perhaps there are some low level repetitive-but-not-critical tasks that a young student could be made responsible for.)

One reason Lumiere and the other pay-to-play research experience services cost so much is that they have to pay (very junior PhD and postdoc level) people to mentor them.

No mentoring or research was asked for. Just questions about studying there to decide whether to apply ED. You can disagree on whether the SLAC professor was kind of a jerk, but it is a very bad look for SLACs trying to sell themselves on intimate interaction with students. And it is against the prof's self-interest when the department is only producing a few majors a year...and basically has almost no students "for whose learning she is responsible."

You have no idea how many junk emails a particular professor gets per week. If you're on DCUM you know that many many applicants apply for niche subjects with the plan to switch to econ freshman year.

SLACs have whole departments tasked with responding to queries from high school students. It's not the role of teaching faculty to do so.

You apparently don't know any professors in niche humanities majors at SLACs -- or seem to have much familiarity with SLACs at all.

You also have a very interesting take, namely, that a professor at a dying humanities department with 2-3 majors a year should not make an "email's worth of effort" to secure enrollment of a potential major the following year. If you are the "OP business prof," might I suggest you get to know your colleagues in marketing better?

As for the "role of teaching faculty" (a redundant phrase in discussing SLACs), it is, to be sure, not part of their job description. But that means, in the long run, they are in danger of not having jobs.

I was not the OP.

For SLACs, niche departments are service departments. Anthropology and comparative literature professors often teach, for the most part, non-majors who are fulfilling distribution requirements. Some may lament the lack of serious students committed to their discipline; others may think such students take more time and energy than the average.

A big rebound in, for example, the number of art history or German majors is highly unlikely, even if professors in those departments start responding to emails from random high school students.

That’s really the point: this thread is about contacting professors. I gave an example where a high school student contacting one, before committing to, say, ED is not only appropriate but wise (for an actual humanities kid who will not change majors). If a SLAC professor thinks “having such students take(s) more time and energy” than it’s worth, and does not deign to respond to an email, then that’s something the kid really needs to know — all the more so because it is a SLAC. If a professor is the opposite and is psyched to have any kid expressing real, demonstrated interest in an e-mail (unusual, as you are apparently unaware), that’s great information to have as well. I guess you disagree.

Your point that a humanities rebound is not likely is certainly a profound one. But if a professor can increase their majors by 50% every year or so (even from 2 to 3) by answering a few emails, it is highly advisable that they do so, lest they more rapidly lose yet another tenure track “line” in their department or, worse, have their department permanently “consolidated.”

The 16 yr old high schooler doesn’t have “real demonstrated interest” in some boring college research. They are simply trying to check what is perceived as a prestigious box for their college application so they can get into an “elite” school and feel worthy.

If you actually read these posts, the example you are referring to has nothing to do with research and mentoring. Rather, DC was probably applying ED (in only a few weeks) to a SLAC niche humanities department, and wrote a prof. to get a better sense of what it is like majoring in the department (majors yearly could be counted on one hand) before pulling the ED application trigger -- and got no response. Suffice to say, no application was submitted. I am so glad the letter was written before committing, because a similar email was warmly received by a prof at a huge research flagship. Of course an application was submitted there.

There you have it folks, a good reason for a high school kid to contact a professor -- contrary to the thread title.

A high school kid contacting a prof to ask for mentoring and research, on the other hand, is indeed a horrible thing. There is a difference.

I dunno, even a small college might receive 15,000 applications, and far, far more people like your kid who consider applying.

If time were infinite, or could swell in proportion to potential tasks and interactions, it might be reasonable to expect a response. But time is finite, and while any one email might not take much time, all those individual responses add up. As the parent of a college student, I don’t want professors to spend their time responding to high school students (especially those who haven’t even applied!). In a world of finite time, that is not time they’re spending with actual students.

Colleges have ambassadors. They’re called AOs. They tend to be really good at responding to inquiries. If there’s a question they can’t answer, they find it. Sometimes they’ll even put a kid in touch with professors! But they are the front line,

I’m glad your kid got an answer from the university professor, I guess, but tbh it also doesn’t feel like an especially good use of that professor’s time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s kinda obnoxious for HS kids to think they should get a job doing research.

The professor has a slew of graduate students at his fingertips to help with research. Why would someone think he would ask a kid in HS to help with research?Tell me why. Let me real here.

Go get a job at the mall and leave this professor alone.

+1

It’s insulting. No 17 year old can be helpful to them without a lot of work and handholding. Why does anyone feel entitled to their time?

These are probably the same people who moan about faculty kid acceptances. It’s right in line with the complete disrespect they have for the profession.

So professors shouldn't have an interest in growing their fields and developing talent? Yes, teaching others new skills is work. Professors of course do not have unlimited bandwidth. But it's just depressing that this many academia aren't motivated or creative enough to figure out ways to support younger students at all, and only want help to be a one-way street. BTW, my dad was a professor and dean for decades and made time for his students. But I've also observed plenty of prima donna academics over the years who barely interact with students at all. Seems to be getting worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s kinda obnoxious for HS kids to think they should get a job doing research.

The professor has a slew of graduate students at his fingertips to help with research. Why would someone think he would ask a kid in HS to help with research?Tell me why. Let me real here.

Go get a job at the mall and leave this professor alone.

+1

It’s insulting. No 17 year old can be helpful to them without a lot of work and handholding. Why does anyone feel entitled to their time?

These are probably the same people who moan about faculty kid acceptances. It’s right in line with the complete disrespect they have for the profession.

So professors shouldn't have an interest in growing their fields and developing talent? Yes, teaching others new skills is work. Professors of course do not have unlimited bandwidth. But it's just depressing that this many academia aren't motivated or creative enough to figure out ways to support younger students at all, and only want help to be a one-way street. BTW, my dad was a professor and dean for decades and made time for his students. But I've also observed plenty of prima donna academics over the years who barely interact with students at all. Seems to be getting worse.

Do you all really want to pay 40-100k annually to send your kids to schools where professors prioritize email exchanges with high school students (many of whom haven’t even applied) over your kid, who is an actual student? Does that seem like a good use of your money?