What’s the educational difference between a highly-rated college and a good one?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For STEM, overall ranking is less important than the overall program. I have a friend who's son turned down Vanderbilt and Georgetown for Georgia Tech (Aerospace Engineering)

Although I understand your point, almost anyone in the know would consider Georgia Tech to be a more academically rigorous school than Vanderbilt/Georgetown.

[Anonymous]

Top colleges give students funding for travel and internships.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For STEM, overall ranking is less important than the overall program. I have a friend who's son turned down Vanderbilt and Georgetown for Georgia Tech (Aerospace Engineering)

Although I understand your point, almost anyone in the know would consider Georgia Tech to be a more academically rigorous school than Vanderbilt/Georgetown.

+1 - at least for aerospace engineering.

[Anonymous]

Related to peer group - culture. I went to a Top 10 and the culture was focused on studying. Saturday afternoon? Your friends are in the library. Tuesday after class? Student center studying. I even remember girls talking about their favorite “study outfits” (American Apparel leggings + Uggs + Sorority Sweatshirt - I’m dating myself here) because studying was so much a part of the culture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We’re struggling with this question ourselves. Our DD has the grades and scores to probably get into a Top 50, maybe even a Top 20 but doesn’t want to be around rich d-bags, frat bros, trust fund kids and jocks. She likes her diverse friend group which doesn’t always have to include the smartest kids in the class.

Two schools that are about equally distant from us that we’re considering are Gettysburg (#53 in the US News rankings) and St. Mary’s College of MD (#92), but the impression we get about Gettysburg is that it caters more toward the rich kid/frat bro and the SMCM has more “normal people” (my DD’s words) that tend to flourish there. She seems to much prefer the latter.

YMMV, but that’s our take.

Are you open to Catholic universities? They typically have a focus on the "whole person," and service to the community, which makes them different from my Top 30 $$$$$$ focused alma mater.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree that the peer group is different but that’s not necessarily a good thing for everyone. I did undergrad at a very highly ranked SLAC and found the students bizarrely competitive, anxious, and self-absorbed. Lots of eating disorders, perfectionism, all-or-nothing thinking. In general a very negative vibe. I did my next two graduate degrees at less prestigious institutions and experienced a much better peer group.

Ture. I needed to read that tonight. I have been having buyer's remorse over turning down a top 50 school for merit, but just as you say, I know how intense those schools are and my kid is not like that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The bottom 2/3rds of non t30 schools should not be in college.

The German model is more efficient.

At t20s, the bottom 1/4 of kids are average state school level kids with some hook.

If you go to a shitty school, a 1/4 - 1/3 of your class is decent.

True.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went to a SLAC that was rated #70-80. I got into better SLACs but this one gave me an almost full scholarship and money was very tight in our family. I had a good experience. Too 10% of students were very competitive. I did not get all As. Made some close relationships with professors. Went to an ivy for grad school. Undergrads at the ivy were definitely way more intense and hardworking than at my college. I took an undergrad math class at the ivy and it was way harder than my college. I struggled my first year in grad school and was a bit intimidated by my fellow students who mostly came from big name schools including ivys and top state schools. They clearly had many more research and internship opportunities than me. I caught up though by my second year and graduated just fine with everyone. This was a PhD program. I’m still grateful to my slac for giving me a good education at a great price

Thank you for sharing this.

[Anonymous]

My kid picked her safety. She has done better and stood out much more than she did at her DMV cut throat high school. Good for her self esteem ( and her grad school applications). Trust your child’s choice!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the UMD professor: Do you give attendance points that will increase grades? (My friend’s son went to UMD and this was the case for him). Sounds like high school, to me.

My son’s SLAC:
-no extra credit
-most exams were essay form vs scan-tron
-no opting out of finals
-minimal grading on the curve
-no homework points

I’m sure your son walks 5 miles uphill in snow to class, too.

To frame PP’s point a different way, I think s/he is pointing out that, even if you assume the quality of professors is held constant, smaller classes (and better grad students) make more challenging assignments/evaluations possible.

FWIW, having taught/studied/had a kid at total of four different t20s, I think ambition/affluence/HS preparation rather than brains/academic orientation/mastery of material/effort is what differentiates a t20 cohort from cohorts at other good schools. But, as other posters have already suggested, you’ll find both that the top students at the good schools are just as smart/capable and that your kids’ college educations will largely be a function of what they make of them. Opportunities/challenges are everywhere but @ some places (t20s) they are obviously/readily available (but often highly competitive) and other places you have to seek them out.

I agree t30 coddle their students more.

One of my professors at a non-t30 school had previously taught at Harvard, and he said that the only difference between the two schools from his perspective was that it was easier to make an "A" at Harvard. He said that at Harvard it is assumed that everyone will deserve an A, so there is no pressure for grade deflation. In fact, the opposite was true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the UMD professor: Do you give attendance points that will increase grades? (My friend’s son went to UMD and this was the case for him). Sounds like high school, to me.

My son’s SLAC:
-no extra credit
-most exams were essay form vs scan-tron
-no opting out of finals
-minimal grading on the curve
-no homework points

I’m sure your son walks 5 miles uphill in snow to class, too.

To frame PP’s point a different way, I think s/he is pointing out that, even if you assume the quality of professors is held constant, smaller classes (and better grad students) make more challenging assignments/evaluations possible.

FWIW, having taught/studied/had a kid at total of four different t20s, I think ambition/affluence/HS preparation rather than brains/academic orientation/mastery of material/effort is what differentiates a t20 cohort from cohorts at other good schools. But, as other posters have already suggested, you’ll find both that the top students at the good schools are just as smart/capable and that your kids’ college educations will largely be a function of what they make of them. Opportunities/challenges are everywhere but @ some places (t20s) they are obviously/readily available (but often highly competitive) and other places you have to seek them out.

I agree t30 coddle their students more.

One of my professors at a non-t30 school had previously taught at Harvard, and he said that the only difference between the two schools from his perspective was that it was easier to make an "A" at Harvard. He said that at Harvard it is assumed that everyone will deserve an A, so there is no pressure for grade deflation. In fact, the opposite was true.

Agree about GPA, but I think at least 3 different things are at stake here — how challenging are the assignments, how much/what kind of feedback does/can the student get, and what’s the grading scale. I think t20 profs are working in an environment that enables challenge and substantive/cumulative feedback and one where the ranking and sorting/QC function of grading can be seen as relatively unimportant. T20 profs don’t all see it this way and there are some non-t20 profs who are similarly situated, but, having taught in both contexts, I experienced a different set of imperatives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Professors are great, accessible, and hold high expectations for their students. Though “good” colleges may have great professors, they may be less accessible due to class size and be unable to hold students to the highest academic standards. The result is that the syllabus covers less material, less complex material, and the assignments are less complex and graded to lower expectations. All this impacts the quality of the learning, especially in a liberal arts program.

New Poster. OP - thank you for starting this thread! It's a good discussion to have.

But I must quibble with your takeaway above. The one thing I noticed from this conversation, some posters are comparing a T20 SLAC to a "good" state school. Those are not apt comparisons.

Can we compare T20 SLACs to "good" SLACS (the CTCL school, St. Mary's College of Maryland type of schools, etc.)

And then let's compare top state schools (Michigan, Berkeley, UVA) to "good" state schools (Penn St, Pitt, Ohio State, Towson, VA Tech, etc.)

It doesn't help to compare a top SLAC to a good state school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Professors are great, accessible, and hold high expectations for their students. Though “good” colleges may have great professors, they may be less accessible due to class size and be unable to hold students to the highest academic standards. The result is that the syllabus covers less material, less complex material, and the assignments are less complex and graded to lower expectations. All this impacts the quality of the learning, especially in a liberal arts program.

New Poster. OP - thank you for starting this thread! It's a good discussion to have.

But I must quibble with your takeaway above. The one thing I noticed from this conversation, some posters are comparing a T20 SLAC to a "good" state school. Those are not apt comparisons.

Can we compare T20 SLACs to "good" SLACS (the CTCL school, St. Mary's College of Maryland type of schools, etc.)

And then let's compare top state schools (Michigan, Berkeley, UVA) to "good" state schools (Penn St, Pitt, Ohio State, Towson, VA Tech, etc.)

It doesn't help to compare a top SLAC to a good state school.

I got my BS from what you call a "good state school", and my PhD from a "top state school".

At the good school, the mentality was sink or swim. So, the successful students worked hard, learned to collaborate, and studied. The partiers either changed majors to non STEM or dropped out. At the top school (state), everyone got A's and B's if they showed up at class. And I am talking undergrad students (I was a TA). At my good state school, a 3.0 was a good GPA, top quarter of the graduating class. At the top school, median was about a 3.5. The graduates from the good school were 100% as prepared as those from the top school (maybe better prepared).

With that said, at the good school, there was always a party going on. There was an undercurrent of drinking -- not of the successful students in the top majors, but...And there was a cohort that never went to class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the UMD professor: Do you give attendance points that will increase grades? (My friend’s son went to UMD and this was the case for him). Sounds like high school, to me.

My son’s SLAC:
-no extra credit
-most exams were essay form vs scan-tron
-no opting out of finals
-minimal grading on the curve
-no homework points

Ironically, top publics have far less extra-credit/opt-out exams/HW points than privates.

This is simply because the class sizes are so large that professors have no interest in grading extra-credit assignments, homework, keeping track of who's opted out of what exam, and keeping track of who is attending/participating in class.

Meanwhile privates tend to be much more coddling of their students due to small size and allowing plenty of extra credit/homework points/participation points/opting out of exams, etc.

Oftentimes public universities won't accept any late assignments at all for any reason, while professors at privates will be more willing (and instructed) to work with their students with flexible deadlines, often with no point deduction.

This is actually a positive of attending a top private vs. a top public. Much more leeway and less stress for students.

I went to both public and private universities. I found the opposite to be true. The private school teachers would semi-joke “The deadline is a deadline. Hand it in by then or you get a zero unless you are dead and then the zero won’t matter.” The public university was full of more slacker students and sometimes it felt like the teachers were begging the students to hand work in. It felt like 5th grade. “Many of you haven’t handed in your paper due last week. This is your last (of three) reminders.” It made me cringe that the teachers were so desperate. The only extra credit came from public school.

[Anonymous]

I went to a small public college, large state flagship for grad school, then a T10 private for another grad degree.

There will always be a mix at the publics. That’s the beauty of it. The smartest people I’ve ever met were at the publics. That’s where you will find the diamonds in the rough. Yes, they can be big and uncaring places. Guess what - so is the real world.

The Top 10 honestly seemed a lot like a money grab to me. But then again, I’m a public school person at heart.