Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taught at William and Mary and faculty there get a lot more training in teaching, how to give good feedback on essays,how to help students improve their writing, etc. This is something that you don't see at a Research University.

My kids are all at SLACS and they have opportunities like the chance to attend a job talk and give input into department hiring decisions. At a research university, these activities are for grad students, not undergrad students.
THere are more undergraduate research opportunities, and funding for undergrad research usually. MacAlester has some huge percent of students getting NSF grants for grad school because so many of them co-author with faculty. Very unusual for undergraduates. We toured one college where they had a boat that natural resource majors used to gather samples, etc. Not sure you would see this for undergrads elsewhere.
In my opinion, you get better letters of recommendation from faculty at SLACS because they know your student more.
I go to academic conferences in my field and uniformly if a faculty member brings a student along and has them present their senior thesis, etc. this is someone who teaches at a SLAC, not an R1.

OK, I'll bite. What is the "huge" percentage of MacAlester students getting NSF grants for grad school? Less than 1%?

The vast majority of the NSF grad fellowships are awarded to R1 students (86%) . My DC just graduated from Stanford and 20% of the seniors in DC's major received NSF grad research fellowships.

https://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2019/08/nsf-graduate-fellowships-disproportionately-go-students-few-top-schools

NP: Yes but SLACs have so few numbers enrolled, and relatively few STEM majors so they aren't going to show up in that kind of measure. If you go to a SLAC with a good STEM program and are a STEM major you have a strong chance of getting STEM phd and of getting a fellowship if you want to take that path. There may be less than 10 students at your school who want to. Sure, Stanford or other tippy top schools are going to have more, but given all the STEM majors at less stellar R1s, SLACs are a more viable route for many students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good luck at Hopkins (grad school anyway). I knew one person there who would barely make time for her doctoral thesis advisee.

Some faculty members at big research universities are selfish, desperate for tenure, do NOT like teaching and are under all sorts of pressures to do other things (like get grants, publish, etc).

N=1

Are you honestly debating the PP's last statement?

It’s meaningless — as a statement re JHU specifically or R1s generally and it offers no basis of comparison. Some (blanks) at (blank) are selfish, desperate, do not like their jobs, and are under pressure to spend their time doing other things is true of many jobs/workplaces. And in the context of this thread, it’s not as if junior faculty at SLACs aren’t also under pressure to publish and get grants.

The point is that the structure and incentives at SLACs are set up to reward excellent teaching. If you get a great education at a large research university, that's great, but that's not by design. Yes, junior faculty at SLACs, particularly the top ones, are under pressure to publish, but they also receive things like third year sabbaticals and reduced administrative responsibilities to balance teaching with research. At other SLACs, junior faculty have reduced (but not non-existent) publication requirements. At a typical research university, in order to earn tenure a professor. in my field would be required i to publish a book at a university press, and publish six peer-reviewed articles. At a SLAC, there may very well not be a book requirement, or a book would be used in place of six articles because the expectation is that you'd spend a lot of time teaching and mentoring students. That is NOT the case at research universities. You can get tenure as a terrible, terrible teacher if you publish enough. But if you are an amazing teacher who doesn't publish enough, you will not only not receive tenure, but you will be forced to leave the university. That is the harsh reality of teaching and publishing at higher education institutions.

SLACs may be structured to purge really bad/unpopular teachers (where R1s will promote some excellent researchers who are bad/unpopular teachers), but it’s hard to to argue that the structure/incentives reward “excellent” teaching in a contexts where (a) there’s been no attempt to teach profs to teach and (b) oversight is nonexistent and there are no standards wrt what constitutes good teaching. To the extent that teaching is evaluated, it’s predominantly through enrollments and student feedback. So happy (or not unhappy) customers in real time — a version of popularity. And there are structural factors that interfere with good teaching — small faculty = repetitious courseload, including courses outside your area of expertise and combination of few colleagues and no grad students = fewer opportunities and incentives to keep learning/exploring/stretch yourself wrt developments in your field. This also means undergrads often see one approach to a subject vs have access to many.

I’m not saying SLACs are inherently worse than R1s from an educational perspective — but there are pros and cons of each model of undergraduate education and, ultimately, they are all staffed primarily by profs who were educated/socialized in R1s. There aren’t two separate job (or training) tracks and faculty often move between different types of schools over the course of their careers, usually based on factors like location, prestige, and offer (salary/perks/workload). Since tenure is uncertain, junior faculty can’t afford to ignore the publish or perish imperatives of the field/industry as a whole. And, post-tenure, the “incentives” argument gets iffy.

That is STEM only. For PhDs in all fields I generally cite this:
https://www.swarthmore.edu/institutional-research/doctorates-awarded

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taught at William and Mary and faculty there get a lot more training in teaching, how to give good feedback on essays,how to help students improve their writing, etc. This is something that you don't see at a Research University.

My kids are all at SLACS and they have opportunities like the chance to attend a job talk and give input into department hiring decisions. At a research university, these activities are for grad students, not undergrad students.
THere are more undergraduate research opportunities, and funding for undergrad research usually. MacAlester has some huge percent of students getting NSF grants for grad school because so many of them co-author with faculty. Very unusual for undergraduates. We toured one college where they had a boat that natural resource majors used to gather samples, etc. Not sure you would see this for undergrads elsewhere.
In my opinion, you get better letters of recommendation from faculty at SLACS because they know your student more.
I go to academic conferences in my field and uniformly if a faculty member brings a student along and has them present their senior thesis, etc. this is someone who teaches at a SLAC, not an R1.

OK, I'll bite. What is the "huge" percentage of MacAlester students getting NSF grants for grad school? Less than 1%?

The vast majority of the NSF grad fellowships are awarded to R1 students (86%) . My DC just graduated from Stanford and 20% of the seniors in DC's major received NSF grad research fellowships.

https://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2019/08/nsf-graduate-fellowships-disproportionately-go-students-few-top-schools

As a percentage of students--not sheer numbers--SLACs take the cake:
https://www.reed.edu/reed-magazine/articles/2019/stem-phd-report.html

Interesting. Reed college, with a graduate ratio of 78%, claims to have the highest yield-ratio (whatever it is defined) of students who went go on to obtain Ph. D.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taught at William and Mary and faculty there get a lot more training in teaching, how to give good feedback on essays,how to help students improve their writing, etc. This is something that you don't see at a Research University.

My kids are all at SLACS and they have opportunities like the chance to attend a job talk and give input into department hiring decisions. At a research university, these activities are for grad students, not undergrad students.
THere are more undergraduate research opportunities, and funding for undergrad research usually. MacAlester has some huge percent of students getting NSF grants for grad school because so many of them co-author with faculty. Very unusual for undergraduates. We toured one college where they had a boat that natural resource majors used to gather samples, etc. Not sure you would see this for undergrads elsewhere.
In my opinion, you get better letters of recommendation from faculty at SLACS because they know your student more.
I go to academic conferences in my field and uniformly if a faculty member brings a student along and has them present their senior thesis, etc. this is someone who teaches at a SLAC, not an R1.

OK, I'll bite. What is the "huge" percentage of MacAlester students getting NSF grants for grad school? Less than 1%?

The vast majority of the NSF grad fellowships are awarded to R1 students (86%) . My DC just graduated from Stanford and 20% of the seniors in DC's major received NSF grad research fellowships.

https://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2019/08/nsf-graduate-fellowships-disproportionately-go-students-few-top-schools

As a percentage of students--not sheer numbers--SLACs take the cake:
https://www.reed.edu/reed-magazine/articles/2019/stem-phd-report.html

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good luck at Hopkins (grad school anyway). I knew one person there who would barely make time for her doctoral thesis advisee.

Some faculty members at big research universities are selfish, desperate for tenure, do NOT like teaching and are under all sorts of pressures to do other things (like get grants, publish, etc).

N=1

Are you honestly debating the PP's last statement?

It’s meaningless — as a statement re JHU specifically or R1s generally and it offers no basis of comparison. Some (blanks) at (blank) are selfish, desperate, do not like their jobs, and are under pressure to spend their time doing other things is true of many jobs/workplaces. And in the context of this thread, it’s not as if junior faculty at SLACs aren’t also under pressure to publish and get grants.

The point is that the structure and incentives at SLACs are set up to reward excellent teaching. If you get a great education at a large research university, that's great, but that's not by design. Yes, junior faculty at SLACs, particularly the top ones, are under pressure to publish, but they also receive things like third year sabbaticals and reduced administrative responsibilities to balance teaching with research. At other SLACs, junior faculty have reduced (but not non-existent) publication requirements. At a typical research university, in order to earn tenure a professor. in my field would be required i to publish a book at a university press, and publish six peer-reviewed articles. At a SLAC, there may very well not be a book requirement, or a book would be used in place of six articles because the expectation is that you'd spend a lot of time teaching and mentoring students. That is NOT the case at research universities. You can get tenure as a terrible, terrible teacher if you publish enough. But if you are an amazing teacher who doesn't publish enough, you will not only not receive tenure, but you will be forced to leave the university. That is the harsh reality of teaching and publishing at higher education institutions.

Do you work for a SLAC? Just curious.

I went to a SLAC and am now a tenured professor at a research university. I have friends who teach at SLACs, and have also reviewed tenure dossiers for junior faculty at both SLACs and research universities. The differences in expectations of faculty with regard to teaching and research are substantive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Taught at William and Mary and faculty there get a lot more training in teaching, how to give good feedback on essays,how to help students improve their writing, etc. This is something that you don't see at a Research University.

My kids are all at SLACS and they have opportunities like the chance to attend a job talk and give input into department hiring decisions. At a research university, these activities are for grad students, not undergrad students.
THere are more undergraduate research opportunities, and funding for undergrad research usually. MacAlester has some huge percent of students getting NSF grants for grad school because so many of them co-author with faculty. Very unusual for undergraduates. We toured one college where they had a boat that natural resource majors used to gather samples, etc. Not sure you would see this for undergrads elsewhere.
In my opinion, you get better letters of recommendation from faculty at SLACS because they know your student more.
I go to academic conferences in my field and uniformly if a faculty member brings a student along and has them present their senior thesis, etc. this is someone who teaches at a SLAC, not an R1.

OK, I'll bite. What is the "huge" percentage of MacAlester students getting NSF grants for grad school? Less than 1%?

The vast majority of the NSF grad fellowships are awarded to R1 students (86%) . My DC just graduated from Stanford and 20% of the seniors in DC's major received NSF grad research fellowships.

https://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2019/08/nsf-graduate-fellowships-disproportionately-go-students-few-top-schools

Anonymous wrote:Taught at William and Mary and faculty there get a lot more training in teaching, how to give good feedback on essays,how to help students improve their writing, etc. This is something that you don't see at a Research University.

My kids are all at SLACS and they have opportunities like the chance to attend a job talk and give input into department hiring decisions. At a research university, these activities are for grad students, not undergrad students.
THere are more undergraduate research opportunities, and funding for undergrad research usually. MacAlester has some huge percent of students getting NSF grants for grad school because so many of them co-author with faculty. Very unusual for undergraduates. We toured one college where they had a boat that natural resource majors used to gather samples, etc. Not sure you would see this for undergrads elsewhere.
In my opinion, you get better letters of recommendation from faculty at SLACS because they know your student more.
I go to academic conferences in my field and uniformly if a faculty member brings a student along and has them present their senior thesis, etc. this is someone who teaches at a SLAC, not an R1.

OK, I'll bite. What is the "huge" percentage of MacAlester students getting NSF grants for grad school? Less than 1%?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good luck at Hopkins (grad school anyway). I knew one person there who would barely make time for her doctoral thesis advisee.

Some faculty members at big research universities are selfish, desperate for tenure, do NOT like teaching and are under all sorts of pressures to do other things (like get grants, publish, etc).

N=1

Are you honestly debating the PP's last statement?

It’s meaningless — as a statement re JHU specifically or R1s generally and it offers no basis of comparison. Some (blanks) at (blank) are selfish, desperate, do not like their jobs, and are under pressure to spend their time doing other things is true of many jobs/workplaces. And in the context of this thread, it’s not as if junior faculty at SLACs aren’t also under pressure to publish and get grants.

The point is that the structure and incentives at SLACs are set up to reward excellent teaching. If you get a great education at a large research university, that's great, but that's not by design. Yes, junior faculty at SLACs, particularly the top ones, are under pressure to publish, but they also receive things like third year sabbaticals and reduced administrative responsibilities to balance teaching with research. At other SLACs, junior faculty have reduced (but not non-existent) publication requirements. At a typical research university, in order to earn tenure a professor. in my field would be required i to publish a book at a university press, and publish six peer-reviewed articles. At a SLAC, there may very well not be a book requirement, or a book would be used in place of six articles because the expectation is that you'd spend a lot of time teaching and mentoring students. That is NOT the case at research universities. You can get tenure as a terrible, terrible teacher if you publish enough. But if you are an amazing teacher who doesn't publish enough, you will not only not receive tenure, but you will be forced to leave the university. That is the harsh reality of teaching and publishing at higher education institutions.

Do you work for a SLAC? Just curious.

Taught at William and Mary and faculty there get a lot more training in teaching, how to give good feedback on essays,how to help students improve their writing, etc. This is something that you don't see at a Research University.

My kids are all at SLACS and they have opportunities like the chance to attend a job talk and give input into department hiring decisions. At a research university, these activities are for grad students, not undergrad students.
THere are more undergraduate research opportunities, and funding for undergrad research usually. MacAlester has some huge percent of students getting NSF grants for grad school because so many of them co-author with faculty. Very unusual for undergraduates. We toured one college where they had a boat that natural resource majors used to gather samples, etc. Not sure you would see this for undergrads elsewhere.
In my opinion, you get better letters of recommendation from faculty at SLACS because they know your student more.
I go to academic conferences in my field and uniformly if a faculty member brings a student along and has them present their senior thesis, etc. this is someone who teaches at a SLAC, not an R1.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good luck at Hopkins (grad school anyway). I knew one person there who would barely make time for her doctoral thesis advisee.

Some faculty members at big research universities are selfish, desperate for tenure, do NOT like teaching and are under all sorts of pressures to do other things (like get grants, publish, etc).

N=1

Are you honestly debating the PP's last statement?

It’s meaningless — as a statement re JHU specifically or R1s generally and it offers no basis of comparison. Some (blanks) at (blank) are selfish, desperate, do not like their jobs, and are under pressure to spend their time doing other things is true of many jobs/workplaces. And in the context of this thread, it’s not as if junior faculty at SLACs aren’t also under pressure to publish and get grants.

The point is that the structure and incentives at SLACs are set up to reward excellent teaching. If you get a great education at a large research university, that's great, but that's not by design. Yes, junior faculty at SLACs, particularly the top ones, are under pressure to publish, but they also receive things like third year sabbaticals and reduced administrative responsibilities to balance teaching with research. At other SLACs, junior faculty have reduced (but not non-existent) publication requirements. At a typical research university, in order to earn tenure a professor. in my field would be required i to publish a book at a university press, and publish six peer-reviewed articles. At a SLAC, there may very well not be a book requirement, or a book would be used in place of six articles because the expectation is that you'd spend a lot of time teaching and mentoring students. That is NOT the case at research universities. You can get tenure as a terrible, terrible teacher if you publish enough. But if you are an amazing teacher who doesn't publish enough, you will not only not receive tenure, but you will be forced to leave the university. That is the harsh reality of teaching and publishing at higher education institutions.

Truth is most parents do not care about the "education" they only care about their child getting a credential and living vicariously through their sports cheering, partying and dating.

Oh. I guess that is why numerous other posters have had this same experience, when comparing large research universities to SLAC's...but yeah, all of their experiences are "meaningless" because they offend your sensibilities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good luck at Hopkins (grad school anyway). I knew one person there who would barely make time for her doctoral thesis advisee.

Some faculty members at big research universities are selfish, desperate for tenure, do NOT like teaching and are under all sorts of pressures to do other things (like get grants, publish, etc).

N=1

Are you honestly debating the PP's last statement?

It’s meaningless — as a statement re JHU specifically or R1s generally and it offers no basis of comparison. Some (blanks) at (blank) are selfish, desperate, do not like their jobs, and are under pressure to spend their time doing other things is true of many jobs/workplaces. And in the context of this thread, it’s not as if junior faculty at SLACs aren’t also under pressure to publish and get grants.

Oldest daughter graduated from a top public university. Most of her classes, especially the first couple of years, were "taught" by foreign grad students who she couldn't understand and who were also rude and obnoxious.

D2 goes to top 10 private and almost all of her courses are taught by real professors.