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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Professor quality matters if you actually get to see the professor. Yes I had good profs at State U, on paper, but I rarely got to interact with them in a class of 200-300-500 and a smaller group led by a TA a few years older than me. At private it was me and ten others in a smaller classroom and occasionally a pub after class. Much different interaction level.

I had a very different experience at State U. Most students didn't care to interact with the professors, so when I sought them out after class or during office hours, they were usually pretty open for questions or conversation.

The problem is that at the flagship/top public U's, a professors' job is research first and foremost, then advising grad students, teaching PhD. level class, etc. etc. Teaching undergrads is pretty low down. They also have massive classes to teach.

They have a lot of responsibilities so they tend to be completely burnt out by the time office hours comes by. It's not that they don't want to help undergrads (although some don't like any any university), it's that they simply don't have all that much time.

[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

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.

Then you went to a very bad public university or took a joke major, unfortunately. Also seemed to have gone to a mediocre (or research-focused) private, the best ones, especially SLACs, are extremely willing to help students manage workload.

Public universities viciously weed out the wheat from the chaff in the first few semester of college, to force them out of majors as they don't have enough seats.

There is no weeding out in private universities - most of that happens at admissions.

I went to a top 10 school. There was a lot of weeding out for competitive majors. Maybe it wasn’t based on space, as you note, but you surely had to earn your keep in Econ, Bio, journalism & engineering.

[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

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.

Then you went to a very bad public university or took a joke major, unfortunately. Also seemed to have gone to a mediocre (or research-focused) private, the best ones, especially SLACs, are extremely willing to help students manage workload.

Public universities viciously weed out the wheat from the chaff in the first few semester of college, to force them out of majors as they don't have enough seats.

There is no weeding out in private universities - most of that happens at admissions.

I went to a top 10 school. There was a lot of weeding out for competitive majors. Maybe it wasn’t based on space, as you note, but you surely had to earn your keep in Econ, Bio, journalism & engineering.

There's a difference between students dropping a major/premed out due to coursework difficulty (which certainly happens in MIT, Johns Hopkins pre-med) and a deliberate attempt to get rid of 50%+ of the entering class

[Anonymous]

The academic difference is slight, and more of that would be from exposure to somewhat smarter classmates. The perceived prestige difference is what most are banking on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For any individual student, is it easier to get a higher GPA in a lower-rate college than a highly-rate college?

Gpa at public unis might be harder than at ivies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Professor quality matters if you actually get to see the professor. Yes I had good profs at State U, on paper, but I rarely got to interact with them in a class of 200-300-500 and a smaller group led by a TA a few years older than me. At private it was me and ten others in a smaller classroom and occasionally a pub after class. Much different interaction level.

I had a very different experience at State U. Most students didn't care to interact with the professors, so when I sought them out after class or during office hours, they were usually pretty open for questions or conversation.

+1 UMD professor here. This is my experience as a professor at a public university. Most students do not attend office hours or interact with me after class. However, for those that do, I enjoy interacting with them, providing additional help with concepts from class, or providing letters of recommendation. Sad to say, but the most important aspect of my job in obtaining tenure is research.

At Hopkins, most students attended office hours, stayed after class or attempted to interact with me beyond class time. In general, they were more savvy about networking and obtaining strong recommendation letters.

A lot of handholding - is that a bad thing?

I briefly taught at a mid-tier SLAC and professors were expected to prioritize teaching and service, which translates to a lot of face time with students. I was expected to do a lot of handholding for student retention.

[Anonymous]

I've had kids at JMU, W&M and a top 5 private college. The level of academics and quality of professors is light-years ahead at W&M vs. JMU. The difference is smaller between W&M and the private college, but is magnified by the fact that the classes at the private are smaller and the average student at the private college is brighter than the average student at W&M, so the classes can be taught at a little higher level, with more attention from the professor. Also, the writing instruction at the private is much, much better, again because classes are smaller.

[Anonymous]

I graduated from a top 3 law school, but spent my last semester at a school that just snuck into the bottom of the top 25 (to be with my husband who was working in that city). Many years later, I still count two of the professors from the so-so school as among the best profs I ever had. To me, the biggest differences were the peer group and professors' expectations of students. Many of the students at the so-so school just wanted to be spoon-fed answers. You can't learn to be a good lawyer that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Professor quality matters if you actually get to see the professor. Yes I had good profs at State U, on paper, but I rarely got to interact with them in a class of 200-300-500 and a smaller group led by a TA a few years older than me. At private it was me and ten others in a smaller classroom and occasionally a pub after class. Much different interaction level.

I had a very different experience at State U. Most students didn't care to interact with the professors, so when I sought them out after class or during office hours, they were usually pretty open for questions or conversation.

The problem is that at the flagship/top public U's, a professors' job is research first and foremost, then advising grad students, teaching PhD. level class, etc. etc. Teaching undergrads is pretty low down. They also have massive classes to teach.

They have a lot of responsibilities so they tend to be completely burnt out by the time office hours comes by. It's not that they don't want to help undergrads (although some don't like any any university), it's that they simply don't have all that much time.

I was a graduate teaching assistant at Michigan and I was the one who wrote letters of recommendation for the undergrads, not the professor of record for the course. I literally had no idea what I was doing and I suspect the letters I wrote weren't very good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Professor quality matters if you actually get to see the professor. Yes I had good profs at State U, on paper, but I rarely got to interact with them in a class of 200-300-500 and a smaller group led by a TA a few years older than me. At private it was me and ten others in a smaller classroom and occasionally a pub after class. Much different interaction level.

I had a very different experience at State U. Most students didn't care to interact with the professors, so when I sought them out after class or during office hours, they were usually pretty open for questions or conversation.

+1 UMD professor here. This is my experience as a professor at a public university. Most students do not attend office hours or interact with me after class. However, for those that do, I enjoy interacting with them, providing additional help with concepts from class, or providing letters of recommendation. Sad to say, but the most important aspect of my job in obtaining tenure is research.

At Hopkins, most students attended office hours, stayed after class or attempted to interact with me beyond class time. In general, they were more savvy about networking and obtaining strong recommendation letters.

A lot of handholding - is that a bad thing?

I briefly taught at a mid-tier SLAC and professors were expected to prioritize teaching and service, which translates to a lot of face time with students. I was expected to do a lot of handholding for student retention.

Handholding can be beneficial or detrimental to student growth depending on the student and the situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For any individual student, is it easier to get a higher GPA in a lower-rate college than a highly-rate college?

Gpa at public unis might be harder than at ivies.

Ivies and schools like Duke are usually the ones with the highest average GPAs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've had kids at JMU, W&M and a top 5 private college. The level of academics and quality of professors is light-years ahead at W&M vs. JMU. The difference is smaller between W&M and the private college, but is magnified by the fact that the classes at the private are smaller and the average student at the private college is brighter than the average student at W&M, so the classes can be taught at a little higher level, with more attention from the professor. Also, the writing instruction at the private is much, much better, again because classes are smaller.

Was the "top 5" a national university or a SLAC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Professor quality matters if you actually get to see the professor. Yes I had good profs at State U, on paper, but I rarely got to interact with them in a class of 200-300-500 and a smaller group led by a TA a few years older than me. At private it was me and ten others in a smaller classroom and occasionally a pub after class. Much different interaction level.

I had a very different experience at State U. Most students didn't care to interact with the professors, so when I sought them out after class or during office hours, they were usually pretty open for questions or conversation.

The problem is that at the flagship/top public U's, a professors' job is research first and foremost, then advising grad students, teaching PhD. level class, etc. etc. Teaching undergrads is pretty low down. They also have massive classes to teach.

They have a lot of responsibilities so they tend to be completely burnt out by the time office hours comes by. It's not that they don't want to help undergrads (although some don't like any any university), it's that they simply don't have all that much time.

I was a graduate teaching assistant at Michigan and I was the one who wrote letters of recommendation for the undergrads, not the professor of record for the course. I literally had no idea what I was doing and I suspect the letters I wrote weren't very good.

That is pretty typical of a large research university.

[Anonymous]

There are outstanding professors at every institution. There are more chances to be a big fish at the “good” school for a kid with outstanding intellect. There will be smart kids in both places, but maybe more of them at the highly rated school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is no small point that he has mostly had TA's so far.

That would NEVER happen in a second tier SLAC, which are much more known for their relationships with faculty. There are literally no grad students, teachers have kids over for dinner with their families at the end of the course, etc.

My child has thrived at her CTCL. Small, tight knit community that is a perfect place to finish growing up (which is what college kids are really doing)

Same here. There are differences in teaching methods that make a huge difference. Some mid-tier SLACS are very collaborative and also somewhat more nurturing than top private universities, top state universities, or even mid-tier state state universities.