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.

Anonymous wrote:Many professors, including myself, allocate a certain amount of points for class participation. That includes coming to class, on time, having done the reading, paying attention, engaging in class discussions, etc.

It allows you to recognize kids who try vs those who keep the seat warm. It is not the same as giving points for attendance. It is requiring full engagement to get the highest grade.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1 I'm a professor at UMD. I previously taught at Hopkins. No measurable different in colleagues or "professor quality." In general I agree about peer group. However, there are many smart kids at UMD that would do well at Hopkins.

This is because UMD is a top research university on par with Hopkins (UMD does not have a medical school while Hopkins has the top-most one, which helps it a lot of in rankings). You'll find a lot of top PhD's among the top publics due to research.

The difference of course is that access to these professors might be lower in a public than a private. Not necessarily by all that much (they are generally inaccessible everywhere), but enough. Also classes tend to be smaller in privates which can help in both learning and interacting with professors.

SLACs on the other hand will have much better professor interaction than both top publics and privates. However generally the best and brightest PhD grads don't want to go to SLACs because they value research first and foremost, while SLAC jobs tend to consist of a lot of teaching. SLACs will also hire a lot of PhD's from schools with name-value but weak research (i.e. Vanderbilt)

Say what?

"University of Maryland School of Medicine was chartered in 1807 as the first public medical school in the United States."

https://www.medschool.umaryland.edu/about/

UMD's medical school is on a separate campus and is not connected to UMCP. Therefore in rankings UMD-Baltimore and UMD-College Park are considered to be two different schools.

Also Honors College at UMD gives great access to the top professors as they need researchers for their labs and have small H-version classes.

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.

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1 I'm a professor at UMD. I previously taught at Hopkins. No measurable different in colleagues or "professor quality." In general I agree about peer group. However, there are many smart kids at UMD that would do well at Hopkins.

This is because UMD is a top research university on par with Hopkins (UMD does not have a medical school while Hopkins has the top-most one, which helps it a lot of in rankings). You'll find a lot of top PhD's among the top publics due to research.

The difference of course is that access to these professors might be lower in a public than a private. Not necessarily by all that much (they are generally inaccessible everywhere), but enough. Also classes tend to be smaller in privates which can help in both learning and interacting with professors.

SLACs on the other hand will have much better professor interaction than both top publics and privates. However generally the best and brightest PhD grads don't want to go to SLACs because they value research first and foremost, while SLAC jobs tend to consist of a lot of teaching. SLACs will also hire a lot of PhD's from schools with name-value but weak research (i.e. Vanderbilt)

Say what?

"University of Maryland School of Medicine was chartered in 1807 as the first public medical school in the United States."

https://www.medschool.umaryland.edu/about/

UMD's medical school is on a separate campus and is not connected to UMCP. Therefore in rankings UMD-Baltimore and UMD-College Park are considered to be two different schools.

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

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1 I'm a professor at UMD. I previously taught at Hopkins. No measurable different in colleagues or "professor quality." In general I agree about peer group. However, there are many smart kids at UMD that would do well at Hopkins.

This is because UMD is a top research university on par with Hopkins (UMD does not have a medical school while Hopkins has the top-most one, which helps it a lot of in rankings). You'll find a lot of top PhD's among the top publics due to research.

The difference of course is that access to these professors might be lower in a public than a private. Not necessarily by all that much (they are generally inaccessible everywhere), but enough. Also classes tend to be smaller in privates which can help in both learning and interacting with professors.

SLACs on the other hand will have much better professor interaction than both top publics and privates. However generally the best and brightest PhD grads don't want to go to SLACs because they value research first and foremost, while SLAC jobs tend to consist of a lot of teaching. SLACs will also hire a lot of PhD's from schools with name-value but weak research (i.e. Vanderbilt)

Say what?

"University of Maryland School of Medicine was chartered in 1807 as the first public medical school in the United States."

https://www.medschool.umaryland.edu/about/

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.

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.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1 I'm a professor at UMD. I previously taught at Hopkins. No measurable different in colleagues or "professor quality." In general I agree about peer group. However, there are many smart kids at UMD that would do well at Hopkins.

This is because UMD is a top research university on par with Hopkins (UMD does not have a medical school while Hopkins has the top-most one, which helps it a lot of in rankings). You'll find a lot of top PhD's among the top publics due to research.

The difference of course is that access to these professors might be lower in a public than a private. Not necessarily by all that much (they are generally inaccessible everywhere), but enough. Also classes tend to be smaller in privates which can help in both learning and interacting with professors.

SLACs on the other hand will have much better professor interaction than both top publics and privates. However generally the best and brightest PhD grads don't want to go to SLACs because they value research first and foremost, while SLAC jobs tend to consist of a lot of teaching. SLACs will also hire a lot of PhD's from schools with name-value but weak research (i.e. Vanderbilt)