Wake, UGA, or Tulane

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are people on this thread really discovering that public universities are TA-led classes for intro courses? This is a very common practice, which is why liberal arts colleges break their backs exclaiming their classes are 100% professor taught. Privates tend to be better about having professors teach, not some poor grad student trying to get through their degree.

It’s amazing that this is news to anyone. Ask anyone from your state flagship. Lots of private schools too, but the one’s that don’t do it will tell you outright.

My kid's friends at UMD and VT that just finished Freshman year didn't have any classes taught by a TA (yes for recitations).

I hate anecdotes, but you asked for them.

Not PP. It's more that the probability skyrockets overall as you get through a degree. I had a few upper level courses and my grad course was taught by a grad student at Berkeley. Though, if you're in a smaller major, you may never experience it.

DC is at UGA, in a popular major, and has not had a single class yet taught by TA.

I graduated from mid-sized prestigious private (ivy) and had quite a few classes taught by TAs. Have to admit they were all excellent and were some of my favorite teachers, so it wasn't a big deal. I'm sure all of them went on to great careers as professors.

That’s odd…I went to an Ivy and never had a TA teach a class. I can’t believe you had quite a few classes taught by a TA. My kid goes to an Ivy and never had a TA teach a class.

Again…you used the phrase “quite a few” which doesn’t make it believable.

[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:

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?

So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?

I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?

Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance

Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.

How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?

Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.

Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?

This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.

This is anecdotal.

No it isn’t. Go to the Wake web site if you want the exact numbers but the data is there. They have absurdly small class sizes and every professor both teaches and conducts research.

Here’s the link. 99 percent of classes have less than 50 students, and anecdotally, my freshman had only one class each semester with more than 20 students. 94 percent of faculty have the highest degree available in their field.

https://admissions.wfu.edu/facts/

Why doesn’t this tell us if TA’s or professors teach at Wake?

TAs don’t teach classes at Wake. Call them and confirm if you refuse to accept the reports of parents who send their kids there. Nothing better than you hearing it directly from the horses’s mouth, right?

Don’t (incorrectly) assume TA’s teach at state schools when Wake fails to mention who teaches on their website.

Wake does not use recitations with TAs or classes taught by a TA. I can promise you. State schools do: Here is Maryland's program for example. Will that stop you? https://gradschool.umd.edu/funding/assistantship-information

Nobody said they don’t have TA’s. TA’s assist under the close supervision of the professor, which this source validates. TA’s are not the professor on record or the lead instructor.

You don't understand what is going on at these big state schools. It is most freshman year classes.

Cite?

20% of classes at UNC = most freshman classes (1/5 of classes).

Where did you see this? How do you know the courses in question are for freshman?

University of North Carolina—Chapel Hill 20% 30
Which classes do you think they allow grad students to teach? The introductory ones. Who typically takes these? Freshman. Is this that difficult?

“Thinking” isn’t knowing

Do you know college students? Ask them their school and who taught their freshman year classes. You think it’s better if they are upper level major classes? Not understanding your point.

The point is you have no evidence other than an article ten years old, anecdotes and assumptions.

Don’t know what to tell you, hon. Believe what you want. This is how large universities work….i’d ask the schools you are applying to their policies.

It's true. Many PhD students get funding for teaching lower level undergraduate classes. I thought this was well-known. As PP mentioned, if it wasn't the case, why would privates advertise their high numbers of courses being taught by professors?

There a fair number of schools that hire adjuncts that are very accomplished in the professional world but don’t have terminal degrees.

So there is a group of professors that aren’t TAs that fall under this umbrella.

I don't understand how this applies to what I wrote about graduate students getting tuition and stipends for teaching undergrads. Adjunct professors are professors. PhD students are not adjunct professors.

Assisting with some teaching duties is different than being the sole professor for a course. There is little evidence that it’s likely for students to encounter many, if any courses taught only by a TA. Unless you went to a large public you don’t understand how this works.

[Anonymous]

Some UC's have over three hundred students in the same lecture hall. At that point, might as well learn from a video lecture series...

[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:

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?

So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?

I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?

Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance

Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.

How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?

Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.

Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?

This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.

This is anecdotal.

No it isn’t. Go to the Wake web site if you want the exact numbers but the data is there. They have absurdly small class sizes and every professor both teaches and conducts research.

Here’s the link. 99 percent of classes have less than 50 students, and anecdotally, my freshman had only one class each semester with more than 20 students. 94 percent of faculty have the highest degree available in their field.

https://admissions.wfu.edu/facts/

Why doesn’t this tell us if TA’s or professors teach at Wake?

TAs don’t teach classes at Wake. Call them and confirm if you refuse to accept the reports of parents who send their kids there. Nothing better than you hearing it directly from the horses’s mouth, right?

Don’t (incorrectly) assume TA’s teach at state schools when Wake fails to mention who teaches on their website.

Wake does not use recitations with TAs or classes taught by a TA. I can promise you. State schools do: Here is Maryland's program for example. Will that stop you? https://gradschool.umd.edu/funding/assistantship-information

Nobody said they don’t have TA’s. TA’s assist under the close supervision of the professor, which this source validates. TA’s are not the professor on record or the lead instructor.

You don't understand what is going on at these big state schools. It is most freshman year classes.

Cite?

20% of classes at UNC = most freshman classes (1/5 of classes).

Where did you see this? How do you know the courses in question are for freshman?

University of North Carolina—Chapel Hill 20% 30
Which classes do you think they allow grad students to teach? The introductory ones. Who typically takes these? Freshman. Is this that difficult?

“Thinking” isn’t knowing

Do you know college students? Ask them their school and who taught their freshman year classes. You think it’s better if they are upper level major classes? Not understanding your point.

The point is you have no evidence other than an article ten years old, anecdotes and assumptions.

Don’t know what to tell you, hon. Believe what you want. This is how large universities work….i’d ask the schools you are applying to their policies.

It's true. Many PhD students get funding for teaching lower level undergraduate classes. I thought this was well-known. As PP mentioned, if it wasn't the case, why would privates advertise their high numbers of courses being taught by professors?

There a fair number of schools that hire adjuncts that are very accomplished in the professional world but don’t have terminal degrees.

So there is a group of professors that aren’t TAs that fall under this umbrella.

I don't understand how this applies to what I wrote about graduate students getting tuition and stipends for teaching undergrads. Adjunct professors are professors. PhD students are not adjunct professors.

Assisting with some teaching duties is different than being the sole professor for a course. There is little evidence that it’s likely for students to encounter many, if any courses taught only by a TA. Unless you went to a large public you don’t understand how this works.

I understand it very well. I have been the sole instructor of a class as a TA. I did not design the course but I was the instructor of record and no faculty taught any of the sections of this course. All sections were taught by PhD candidates. The term TA did not appear anywhere on the syllabus, but that's what I was.

[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:

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?

So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?

I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?

Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance

Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.

How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?

Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.

Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?

This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.

This is anecdotal.

No it isn’t. Go to the Wake web site if you want the exact numbers but the data is there. They have absurdly small class sizes and every professor both teaches and conducts research.

Here’s the link. 99 percent of classes have less than 50 students, and anecdotally, my freshman had only one class each semester with more than 20 students. 94 percent of faculty have the highest degree available in their field.

https://admissions.wfu.edu/facts/

Why doesn’t this tell us if TA’s or professors teach at Wake?

TAs don’t teach classes at Wake. Call them and confirm if you refuse to accept the reports of parents who send their kids there. Nothing better than you hearing it directly from the horses’s mouth, right?

Don’t (incorrectly) assume TA’s teach at state schools when Wake fails to mention who teaches on their website.

Wake does not use recitations with TAs or classes taught by a TA. I can promise you. State schools do: Here is Maryland's program for example. Will that stop you? https://gradschool.umd.edu/funding/assistantship-information

Nobody said they don’t have TA’s. TA’s assist under the close supervision of the professor, which this source validates. TA’s are not the professor on record or the lead instructor.

You don't understand what is going on at these big state schools. It is most freshman year classes.

Cite?

20% of classes at UNC = most freshman classes (1/5 of classes).

Where did you see this? How do you know the courses in question are for freshman?

University of North Carolina—Chapel Hill 20% 30
Which classes do you think they allow grad students to teach? The introductory ones. Who typically takes these? Freshman. Is this that difficult?

“Thinking” isn’t knowing

Do you know college students? Ask them their school and who taught their freshman year classes. You think it’s better if they are upper level major classes? Not understanding your point.

The point is you have no evidence other than an article ten years old, anecdotes and assumptions.

Don’t know what to tell you, hon. Believe what you want. This is how large universities work….i’d ask the schools you are applying to their policies.

It's true. Many PhD students get funding for teaching lower level undergraduate classes. I thought this was well-known. As PP mentioned, if it wasn't the case, why would privates advertise their high numbers of courses being taught by professors?

There a fair number of schools that hire adjuncts that are very accomplished in the professional world but don’t have terminal degrees.

So there is a group of professors that aren’t TAs that fall under this umbrella.

I don't understand how this applies to what I wrote about graduate students getting tuition and stipends for teaching undergrads. Adjunct professors are professors. PhD students are not adjunct professors.

Assisting with some teaching duties is different than being the sole professor for a course. There is little evidence that it’s likely for students to encounter many, if any courses taught only by a TA. Unless you went to a large public you don’t understand how this works.

I understand it very well. I have been the sole instructor of a class as a TA. I did not design the course but I was the instructor of record and no faculty taught any of the sections of this course. All sections were taught by PhD candidates. The term TA did not appear anywhere on the syllabus, but that's what I was.

Whose name was on the syllabus? That should be the instructor of record. Name the school and the year.

[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:

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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?

So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?

I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?

Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance

Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.

How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?

Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.

Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?

This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.

This is anecdotal.

No it isn’t. Go to the Wake web site if you want the exact numbers but the data is there. They have absurdly small class sizes and every professor both teaches and conducts research.

Here’s the link. 99 percent of classes have less than 50 students, and anecdotally, my freshman had only one class each semester with more than 20 students. 94 percent of faculty have the highest degree available in their field.

https://admissions.wfu.edu/facts/

Why doesn’t this tell us if TA’s or professors teach at Wake?

TAs don’t teach classes at Wake. Call them and confirm if you refuse to accept the reports of parents who send their kids there. Nothing better than you hearing it directly from the horses’s mouth, right?

Don’t (incorrectly) assume TA’s teach at state schools when Wake fails to mention who teaches on their website.

Wake does not use recitations with TAs or classes taught by a TA. I can promise you. State schools do: Here is Maryland's program for example. Will that stop you? https://gradschool.umd.edu/funding/assistantship-information

Nobody said they don’t have TA’s. TA’s assist under the close supervision of the professor, which this source validates. TA’s are not the professor on record or the lead instructor.

You don't understand what is going on at these big state schools. It is most freshman year classes.

Cite?

20% of classes at UNC = most freshman classes (1/5 of classes).

Where did you see this? How do you know the courses in question are for freshman?

University of North Carolina—Chapel Hill 20% 30
Which classes do you think they allow grad students to teach? The introductory ones. Who typically takes these? Freshman. Is this that difficult?

“Thinking” isn’t knowing

Do you know college students? Ask them their school and who taught their freshman year classes. You think it’s better if they are upper level major classes? Not understanding your point.

The point is you have no evidence other than an article ten years old, anecdotes and assumptions.

Don’t know what to tell you, hon. Believe what you want. This is how large universities work….i’d ask the schools you are applying to their policies.

It's true. Many PhD students get funding for teaching lower level undergraduate classes. I thought this was well-known. As PP mentioned, if it wasn't the case, why would privates advertise their high numbers of courses being taught by professors?

There a fair number of schools that hire adjuncts that are very accomplished in the professional world but don’t have terminal degrees.

So there is a group of professors that aren’t TAs that fall under this umbrella.

I don't understand how this applies to what I wrote about graduate students getting tuition and stipends for teaching undergrads. Adjunct professors are professors. PhD students are not adjunct professors.

Assisting with some teaching duties is different than being the sole professor for a course. There is little evidence that it’s likely for students to encounter many, if any courses taught only by a TA. Unless you went to a large public you don’t understand how this works.

I understand it very well. I have been the sole instructor of a class as a TA. I did not design the course but I was the instructor of record and no faculty taught any of the sections of this course. All sections were taught by PhD candidates. The term TA did not appear anywhere on the syllabus, but that's what I was.

Whose name was on the syllabus? That should be the instructor of record. Name the school and the year.

She posts here often. She taught a freshman required peer review writing course at Hopkins . She did not control the syllabus, at least the TA didn’t when I took the same course. All sections read the same works of fiction and peer review essays written by other students. No exams. Very similar to law school legal writing classes typically taught by adjuncts.

[Anonymous]

It is not uncommon to have TAs assist the primary professor in the class by grading homework and leading Qand A sessions once a week.

It is uncommon to have a TA be the primary instructor for a class. The U.S. News list earlier in this thread, although nearly ten years old, lists schools with the highest percentage of TAs who are the primary instructor of a class.

[Anonymous]

wow the tuition is so much better at UGA as an OOS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:wow the tuition is so much better at UGA as an OOS.

That’s probably why it’s on the list of schools with the most classes primarily taught by TAs. Gotta keep cost down somehow,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:wow the tuition is so much better at UGA as an OOS.

That’s probably why it’s on the list of schools with the most classes primarily taught by TAs. Gotta keep cost down somehow,

The list from ten years ago is irrelevant. Is your college the same as it was 10 years ago? Schools like UGA have become crazy popular post Covid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:wow the tuition is so much better at UGA as an OOS.

That’s probably why it’s on the list of schools with the most classes primarily taught by TAs. Gotta keep cost down somehow,

The list from ten years ago is irrelevant. Is your college the same as it was 10 years ago? Schools like UGA have become crazy popular post Covid.

Why would it be irrelevant? People are stupid and don’t research things like TA use before sending their kids off to school.

[Anonymous]

Here’s a UGA TA manual from 2019-20 for instance. According to this document, 17 percent of the TAs at UGA are Instructors of Record, meaning that they are primarily responsible for the classes they teach. https://www.cs.uga.edu/sites/default/files/in...%20TA%20Handbook.pdf

Do your research folks and don’t rely on what schools are “hot” at any particular point in time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:wow the tuition is so much better at UGA as an OOS.

That’s probably why it’s on the list of schools with the most classes primarily taught by TAs. Gotta keep cost down somehow,

The list from ten years ago is irrelevant. Is your college the same as it was 10 years ago? Schools like UGA have become crazy popular post Covid.

Why would it be irrelevant? People are stupid and don’t research things like TA use before sending their kids off to school.

A lot changes in a decade. Calling people stupid is provincial, be better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:wow the tuition is so much better at UGA as an OOS.

That’s probably why it’s on the list of schools with the most classes primarily taught by TAs. Gotta keep cost down somehow,

The list from ten years ago is irrelevant. Is your college the same as it was 10 years ago? Schools like UGA have become crazy popular post Covid.

Why would it be irrelevant? People are stupid and don’t research things like TA use before sending their kids off to school.

A lot changes in a decade. Calling people stupid is provincial, be better.

Right, but UGA’s own materials show it was still continuing in 2020 and likely today. So maybe assume things haven’t changed unless you have proof they have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a UGA TA manual from 2019-20 for instance. According to this document, 17 percent of the TAs at UGA are Instructors of Record, meaning that they are primarily responsible for the classes they teach. https://www.cs.uga.edu/sites/default/files/in...%20TA%20Handbook.pdf

Do your research folks and don’t rely on what schools are “hot” at any particular point in time.

Instructor of Record (IOR): These TAs have the most responsibilities and work the most independently.
IORs can be assigned to all types of classes and their duties are usually comprehensive. While they are
primary instructors (they do not assist another instructor), they are still supervised by a faculty member.
See section 1.3. for more information.

17% is significantly less than the 35% cited from the outdated USNWR article. IOR's are still supervised. What is your point exactly?