Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Thanks for sharing this. It makes sense. Given the significantly greater rate at which students communicate with one another these days, you can't hide dissatisfaction with teaching quality for long. It behooves colleges to do what they can to make sure their students are happy with their instructors, lest they get a reputation that will lose them some of the students they want most.

A lot of students are just interested in getting good grades easily. I don't think academia should be set up along a customer/service provider model. It's not like going to dinner and ordering a meal. Students do not buy a grade, they earn it.

I'm not at all clear as to how you got the idea I was implying any of what you said. It's important for colleges to have professors who students will want to learn from--that's my point.

NP here. Consider the case of Dr. Maitland Jones, Jr, the chem professor at NYU who was fired after students created a petition protesting that his class was too difficult. This class was a “weed out” course for kids who hoped to eventually enter med school, and the professor has been interviewed saying that in recent years, students expect and demand higher grades for poorer quality work and effort than in the past; this man had published and contributed as an expert in his field and used to be tenured at Princeton for many years. In the past, the course was understood to be one that separated those capable of the rigors of med school from the rest, but now students seem to feel that because they are paying a lot of tuition money and want to go to med school, it is the prof’s fault if they aren’t given the grades they want. Universities are very much customer service oriented now, and students continue demanding what their parents demanded for them through high school, I think.

That's a valid point, of course, but not relevant to what I'm trying to say, which is simply that colleges should be looking for instructors who genuinely love teaching and are good at it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Thanks for sharing this. It makes sense. Given the significantly greater rate at which students communicate with one another these days, you can't hide dissatisfaction with teaching quality for long. It behooves colleges to do what they can to make sure their students are happy with their instructors, lest they get a reputation that will lose them some of the students they want most.

A lot of students are just interested in getting good grades easily. I don't think academia should be set up along a customer/service provider model. It's not like going to dinner and ordering a meal. Students do not buy a grade, they earn it.

I'm not at all clear as to how you got the idea I was implying any of what you said. It's important for colleges to have professors who students will want to learn from--that's my point.

NP here. Consider the case of Dr. Maitland Jones, Jr, the chem professor at NYU who was fired after students created a petition protesting that his class was too difficult. This class was a “weed out” course for kids who hoped to eventually enter med school, and the professor has been interviewed saying that in recent years, students expect and demand higher grades for poorer quality work and effort than in the past; this man had published and contributed as an expert in his field and used to be tenured at Princeton for many years. In the past, the course was understood to be one that separated those capable of the rigors of med school from the rest, but now students seem to feel that because they are paying a lot of tuition money and want to go to med school, it is the prof’s fault if they aren’t given the grades they want. Universities are very much customer service oriented now, and students continue demanding what their parents demanded for them through high school, I think.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:new to the process as a parent, and can’t believe some of these acceptance rates. I went to Georgetown back in the day when I think acceptance rate was over 40%. Vanderbilt now around 5%??? Has the quality of instruction and the overall experience changed that much over the last 20 years when acceptance rate was somewhere around 60-70%??

Oh FFS. You parents got this idea that you can micromanage your precious little snowflake’s grade school and secondary school classrooms and now you want to take that attitude to the university. Nope. Not having it. Power down the chopper.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Thanks for sharing this. It makes sense. Given the significantly greater rate at which students communicate with one another these days, you can't hide dissatisfaction with teaching quality for long. It behooves colleges to do what they can to make sure their students are happy with their instructors, lest they get a reputation that will lose them some of the students they want most.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Thanks for sharing this. It makes sense. Given the significantly greater rate at which students communicate with one another these days, you can't hide dissatisfaction with teaching quality for long. It behooves colleges to do what they can to make sure their students are happy with their instructors, lest they get a reputation that will lose them some of the students they want most.

A lot of students are just interested in getting good grades easily. I don't think academia should be set up along a customer/service provider model. It's not like going to dinner and ordering a meal. Students do not buy a grade, they earn it.

I'm not at all clear as to how you got the idea I was implying any of what you said. It's important for colleges to have professors who students will want to learn from--that's my point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Thanks for sharing this. It makes sense. Given the significantly greater rate at which students communicate with one another these days, you can't hide dissatisfaction with teaching quality for long. It behooves colleges to do what they can to make sure their students are happy with their instructors, lest they get a reputation that will lose them some of the students they want most.

A lot of students are just interested in getting good grades easily. I don't think academia should be set up along a customer/service provider model. It's not like going to dinner and ordering a meal. Students do not buy a grade, they earn it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Thanks for sharing this. It makes sense. Given the significantly greater rate at which students communicate with one another these days, you can't hide dissatisfaction with teaching quality for long. It behooves colleges to do what they can to make sure their students are happy with their instructors, lest they get a reputation that will lose them some of the students they want most.

Anonymous wrote:Prof here. In my discipline, I would say quality of instruction has improved at a lot of Top-50 schools. Tenure requirements used to almost ignore teaching, but in my experience it is now treated as a serious consideration. In addition, some tenured/tenure track faculty have been replaced by teaching professors-- academics will lament this because it reduces a school's research, but such faculty are hired/evaluated/promoted solely on teaching, so they also take it seriously. When I started my career, there was literally no training or consideration related to teaching when we taught PhD students, and now we essentially don't let them go on the academic job market until their teaching evaluations have hit a reasonable threshold. So I think teaching has become significantly stronger over time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure I understand this thread. I can't see any relationship between acceptance rates and quality of instruction/experience.
It is as PP said - huge increase in number of applicants both from here and abroad. Also certain schools getting disproportionate share of applicants. TO and Common App play a big part.
It's not that the quality of the education is notably different.
All of this is slated to change as the pool of applicants is predicted to decline in a few years.
For now, this is the landscape.

There is no connection. OP sounds dumb, and if her kids are like her, they won’t be getting into T20.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:topic cut off - has quality of professors/instruction in schools with declining acceptance rates improved over the last 20 years

It has probably declined overall. Research is mor important to most schools than undergrad teaching, and many academics view their careers as much more dependent on research and publising than teaching.

This is not the case at small, liberal arts colleges.

I would avoid schools that rely heavily on adjunct professors. They are treated very poorly and typically do not have offices, nor are they given support for spending time with students outside of class.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:topic cut off - has quality of professors/instruction in schools with declining acceptance rates improved over the last 20 years

It has probably declined overall. Research is mor important to most schools than undergrad teaching, and many academics view their careers as much more dependent on research and publising than teaching.

How is this different from 20 years ago?

Teaching loads continue to decline.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:topic cut off - has quality of professors/instruction in schools with declining acceptance rates improved over the last 20 years

It has probably declined overall. Research is mor important to most schools than undergrad teaching, and many academics view their careers as much more dependent on research and publising than teaching.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems more likely to me that the quality of teaching would improve rather than decline. Higher population equals higher competition for slots in PhD programs, which should lead to stronger graduates/future professors. This should be true in pretty much all professions.

Many schools are not hiring based on teaching skills, but on research/publication/potential grant sourcing capabilities. A lot of the work of teaching undergrads has been given to adjunct professors, who are often very good, though underpaid and overworked. The system is really broken.

But this was true 20 years ago, too, at least at most schools. Things can improve within a flawed system.