Big Ten expansion moves ahead

College Search & Selection
861

<p>^^ Oh yeah, thanks for the link! I think I’ve read that thread before. There are certainly quite a few weed-out classes at TOSU. After all, admission to professional schools (MD, JD, VET…,etc.) are competitive and the space are very limited. </p>

<p>I’ve been feeling horrible for caolila’s TOSU experience. When it comes to Chem Dept at TOSU, most Pre-meds know that all of the Chem classes are extremely challenging!! If any of you ever get a chance to visit Ohio State, you will realize that Chem Dept is very well funded and regarded academically compared to other hard science majors at TOSU. As a matter of fact, the new 225,000 gross sq.ft. Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and Chemistry Building (CBEC) are currently underconstruction with a price tag of $126 million… Chemistry with its “many buildings” have dominated the landscape of academic core on Columbus campus ever since Paul Flory won his Nobel Prize back in 1974. Having said all that, my heart really goes out for caolila, and hopefully she will rebound from her struggles in this particular class. As I’ve alluded earlier, TOSU is far from perfect, even though there are roughly 5,000 faculties and another 5,000 TAs in charge of 12,000 courses, the experience do varies. My suggestion to her would be to pay a visit to the Younkin Success Center on campus in addition to meetings with his/her department advisor and professor. I think he/she needs a mentor. </p>

<p>Last but not least, for those Pre-professional students out there, I was one of you guys and believe me, I had fought in the academic trenches for “years” in order to become a physician today (with the grace of God of course!). So I know how difficult and competitive if not hardcore or cut-throat some of these Pre-med classes are. Hence, I must be blunt and point out that many if not most of you will probably not make the cut by Junior year and that is certainly, certainly not the end of the world!! And while many top schools here on Cc advertise their higher acceptance rate into the Top-10 Med or Law School - if you enroll and become one of those small fraction of top students. The fact of the matter is that many many more will graduate with a sub 3.5 GPA and ended up with a $1/4 million dollar debt at the age of 21, and worse yet, 0 interview/acceptance from Professional schools, let alone Top-10… Truth is always hard to bear, yet life will always continue on its own course. So long as you stay focus and work hard, you will succeed in life with or without those two-letter abbreviation attached to your name. I’ve seen so many cases and have heard countless regrets from those Pre-med, Pre-law, Pre-vet, Pre-dental turned Engineer and Business majors. In short, don’t believe the hype!! hmm… I am getting sleepy…=.=" Thanks for putting up with my late night rambling…G’nite! :)</p>

862

<p>Some good ideas Sparkeye 7, glad you took a look.</p>

863

<p>Perhaps if the OP on the linked thread had spent the 15 hours a week she spent on athletics studying chemistry instead, she wouldn’t be in her predicament. Life is about making choices, and choices have consequences. </p>

<p>That thread reinforces my determination to try and keep my kids as far away from huge public schools as possible. 500 kids in a classroom? No way can you call that a quality education. </p>

<p>Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using CC App</p>

864

<p>^^ “That thread reinforces my determination to try and keep my kids as far away from huge public schools as possible. 500 kids in a classroom? No way can you call that a quality education.”</p>

<p>Hmm, it is my opinion that quality education IS possible even in a huge class of 500 especially when after class self-study & recitations play a major part of absorbing the material well taught in-class. Unfortunately, for those Pre-Professional students, GPA plays an important part in the overall graduate admission process. Not to discourage any of you, my past Pre-med experience either at MSU or TOSU was that many of my major Pre-Med courses only gave out 5% As. Say, in a class of 500, that translates into a mere 25 students total… In addition, it is certainly not uncommon for a hard working brilliant student with a 3.8 or a perfect 4.0 GPA not to gain admission into any medical school since there are numerous other factors involved (MCAT score, Interviews, Extracurricular Activities, Research & Clinical Experiences). In all honesty, that is also why I am often hesitant if not refrain from advising the Pre-Med-to-be on this board. Knowing what’s ahead, it is a HUGE responsibility that I certainly do not see myself qualify but the Lord Himself. It is a heavy burden to me just thinking about it (selfishly speaking, I want to be able to sleep tight at night!). Nonetheless, my thoughts & prayers certainly go out to those who are struggling… >o<"</p>

865

<p>

</p>

<p>Just FYI, annasdad, large classes are by no means unique to public universities. The largest class at Cornell, an intro psych class, has 1300 students. The intro computer science class at Harvard, CS50, had 525 in the fall of 2010, making it the 4th largest at Harvard according to the Harvard Crimson. The intro economics class, EC10, usually tops out at around 650. Until recently Yale had a popular course known officially as “Biology of Gender and Human Sexuality” but known popularly among students as “Porn in the Morn,” drew as many at 587 students in 2005 but the course was terminated after its science credit was withdrawn. Not sure if this is still the case, but very recently an intro chemistry course at MIT enrolled 570, more than the largest lecture hall on campus, forcing some students to view the lecture from overflow rooms via closed-circuit TV hookups.</p>

<p>Guess you won’t be sending your kids to HYPSM-type schools either, huh?</p>

<p>Seriously, though, if you want small classes, look at LACs. Even at most Ivies, students spend more time in large classes than in small ones. The numbers showing a high percentage of small classes are very misleading; by definition, each of these classes has only a few students, so it takes many dozens of such classes to equal the number of students enrollments in just a single lecture of several hundred students. It’s not a public-v-private thing. At LACs, students spend almost all their time in small classes. At universities, with rare exceptions, students spend as much or more time in large classes than in small ones.</p>

866

<p>It is a common misconception that only public universities have large classes or TAs. Any university with a large graduate student population (Columbia, Harvard and Penn all have 10,000+ graduate students) is going to have a faculty that is dedicated to research and as such, is going to have large classes and TAs. Obviously, a large public university will typically have larger classes on average, but the difference is almost always exaggerated and oftentimes negligible.</p>

<p>Private universities also pad their stats by engaging in questionable practices. Public universities do not do so.</p>

867

<p>

</p>

<p>So what about the student in the 500-student lecture hall (or 200 student, or even 100 student) if that student does not understand the first point made in the lecture, and understanding the rest of the lecture depends on understanding the first point? In a small class, the student can raise his/her hand and ask a question. In a large lecture, that’s not possible (even though it’s likely some of the 499 classmates have the same question). </p>

<p>Yes, I know the student can ask the question later in a TA session, or try to figure it out themselves. But why should they have to? And why not simply put the lecture on video and make it available via You Tube or Vimeo? (Not a new idea; my W went to Michigan State in the early 70s and some of her classes were videotapes of a lecturer who was no longer even at the university.) Why not eliminate the lecture entirely and have extra TA sessions?</p>

<p>Furthermore, how is the lecturer to know whether s/he is getting the lesson across without the ability to interact with a representative sample of the students? Lecturing isn’t teaching. Teaching is a two-way communication process between the teacher and the student. Not possible when there is one lecturer and 500 students.</p>

<p>I realize that when a university has thousands of freshmen they have to get through introductory courses that there are limited possibilities. That’s why a good LAC is always to be preferred to a large university, IMO. (Not that there are not large lecture sections at some LACs; there just aren’t as many of them, or as large.)</p>

868

<p>

</p>

<p>I know that, but this is a Big 10 thread, so the limitation on my initial comment. It’s a good argument for LACs, as I said in my response to Sparkeyes. Why someone would pay $60,000 per year to have their kids sit in a room with 300-400 other “students” is beyond me.</p>

<p>I think there are some smaller research universities where large classes, while not unknown, are the exception. We were told both at Rochester and Case that once past freshman year, most classes are not lecture-hall events.</p>

869

<p>

</p>

<p>I think they fed you misleading information. It’s true that, as at many universities, the majority of classes at Rochester and Case Western are small. And it’s also probably the case that most of the large classes are intro-level classes. But that doesn’t mean students spend most of their time in small classes. At Rochester, 59.3% of the classes have fewer than 20 students, while 13% of the classes have 50 or more students. But it takes more students to fill a large class. Suppose the average small class (<20) has 12 students, and the average large class (50+) has 75. Then students at Rochester would be spending 40% more time in the large (50+) classes than in the small (<20) classes. For the numbers to balance out, it’s got to be the case that many students continue to take large lecture classes well after their freshman year—to the point that the student body as a whole is signed up for more large classes than small ones.</p>

<p>Here’s a little more detail from Case Western’s common data set.</p>

<p>Class size / # of classes
2-9 / 167
10-19 / 316
20-29 / 103
30-39 / 93
40-49 / 34
50-99 / 51
100+ / 29
Total: 793 classes</p>

<p>So Case Western can legitimately claim that most of its classes—483 of 793, or 60.9%, are small (<20), and that it has relatively few large (50+) classes (80 of 793, or 10.1%). Yet it’s likely that Case Western students are spending more time in large classes than in small classes.</p>

<p>Let’s suppose the average class in the 2-9 range has 5 students; the average in the 10-19 range has 15 students, and so on… Then at the top end let’s assume the average class in the 50-99 range has 75 students, and the average 100+ class has 125 students (though just a few extra-large lectures could make this average significantly higher).</p>

<p>Then student enrollments in small classes are:
2-9: 167 classes X 5 enrolled students/class on average = 835 student enrollments
10-19: 316 classes X 15 enrolled students/class ave = 4740 student enrollments
Subtotal = 5575 student enrollments in small classes (<20)</p>

<p>Student enrollments in large classes are:
50-99: 51 classes X 75 enrolled students/class = 3825 student enrollments
100+: 29 classes X 125 students/class = 3625 student enrollments
Subtotal = 7450 student enrollments in large classes (50+)</p>

<p>So at Case, as at Rochester, as at Princeton, despite the apparently lofty numbers of small classes, students are probably spending more time in large classes than in small ones. Concededly, though, it’s even more extreme at Ohio State, where only 32.2% of the classes are <20, and 20% of the classes are 50+.</p>

870

<p>(Updated: July 11, 2011, 5:26 PM ET)</p>

<p>by Joe Schad, ESPN----Ohio State has lost its top 2012 football recruit to Michigan, as offensive tackle Kyle Kalis switched his commitment to the Wolverines last weekend.</p>

<p>Kalis, of St. Edward High School in Lakewood, Ohio, is listed at 6-foot-5 and 306 pounds and is considered one of the nation’s top offensive line recruits. He’s ranked 140th overall and 20th at his position in the ESPNU 150.</p>

<p>The only member of Ohio State’s 2012 recruiting class ranked in the ESPNU 150, Kalis decommitted in June.</p>

<p>“I can’t go there (Ohio State) and take penalties for something I never did,” Kalis told ESPN.com on Monday. “Ohio State is a great program. I’m just not sure how long it will take them to recover. I want a solid, grounded coaching staff with a safe environment. Where there aren’t such tough questions.”</p>

<p>Kalis said although he is an Ohio State fan and has had “constant stress and anxiety” from the community about his decision, it’s the best choice for him.</p>

<p>“When I de-committed to (Ohio State coach) Luke Fickell I called him and told him and he understood where I’m coming from,” Kalis said. “With the turmoil and uncertainty I just couldn’t.”</p>

<p>Kalis said he visited Michigan last weekend and called coach Brady Hoke from the “M” logo at the middle of the field at Michigan Stadium to inform him he was coming to Ann Arbor.</p>

<p>“He is the type of guy I want to play for,” Kalis said. “(Hoke) has an incredible amount of passion. I believe the Michigan-Ohio border is now open. I think you’re going to see eight or nine guys from the state of Ohio going over to Michigan this year.”</p>

<p>Kalis nearly ended his commitment to Ohio State in late May, after Jim Tressel resigned, before a conversation with Fickell changed his mind.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>[Ohio</a> State Buckeyes 2012 recruit Kyle Kalis now headed to Michigan Wolverines - ESPN](<a href=“http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/6757559/ohio-state-buckeyes-2012-recruit-kyle-kalis-now-headed-michigan-wolverines]Ohio”>Ohio State Buckeyes 2012 recruit Kyle Kalis now headed to Michigan Wolverines - ESPN)</p>

871

<p>^ Ya gotta love the bit about Kalis calling Coach Hoke from the “M” logo at the middle of the field in the Big House. Great kid!</p>

872

<p>“He is the type of guy I want to play for,” Kalis said. “(Hoke) has an incredible amount of passion. I believe the Michigan-Ohio border is now open. I think you’re going to see eight or nine guys from the state of Ohio going over to Michigan this year.”</p>

<p>As in the days of Bo Schembechler, once again, Michigan turns to Ohio in order to compete at the highest level. ;p There is absolutely nothing wrong for an Ohio player whose willing to play under an Ohioan coach!! O-H~ :)</p>

873

<p>^^^you are confusing number of students with time spent per student.</p>

874

<p>annasdad,</p>

<p>While I agree and understand with your frustration as a parent when it comes to the lack of interaction in a large classroom setting. One must understand that even in a small class, there is no way that the professor would be able to entertain all of the students’ questions in-class (unless it’s one-to-one, meaning home-school the kids), after all, the LAC also must cover just as vast amount of materials as the large public if not more when it comes to hard sciences. I recall both in MSU and TOSU that Professors (not TAs) are required to set aside 3 office hours per week to make up for the lack of interaction in-class. The hours are usually printed on the syllabus and announced on the first day of the class. Know this, one can easily be a good student if spoon-fed, but in order to be “a great student,” he or she must be pro-active in learning, he or she must be willing to go for that extra mile in order to be The Prime (as in Transformer ;p). I will share with y’all my personal experiences in terms of the attitude, and methods of studying some other time… Gotta go!! :)</p>

875

<p>

</p>

<p>Sam, I assume you’re referring to my post #869. If so, you’re wrong; I’m not confusing anything. </p>

<p>Just think about that mathematics of this. If there are more student enrollments in large (50+) classes than in small (<20 classes), then students in the aggregate and on average MUST be spending more time in large than in small classes. </p>

<p>Look, suppose each student takes exactly 8 classes per year. If each student took exactly as many large as small classes–4 of each—then the total student enrollments in small classes would need to equal the total student enrollments in large classes, right? Of course, there would need to be many more small classes than large classes to make that 50-50 split possible, just because each small class is, by definition, small and can accommodate only so many student enrollments, while each large class is by definition large and requires many more student enrollments to count as a large class. Are you with me so far?</p>

<p>Now of course, it’s not the case that all students take the same number of classes, and they take them in different mixes of large and small. But if on average for the entire student body the number of small classes taken is equal to the number of large classes taken, then the total number of student enrollments in small classes must STILL equal the total number of student enrollment in large classes. Again, there will need to be many more small classes than large classes for that to happen, but the total student enrollments in classes of each type still need to be equal. Follow me?</p>

<p>But if students are, on average, taking more small classes than large classes, then there need to be more total student enrollments in small than in large classes. And if, conversely, there are more total student enrollments in large than in small classes, then it must be the case that students are on average taking more large than small classes. That’s just mathematically and logically an inescapable conclusion. And that, in fact, is the situation not only at U Rochester and Case Western, but also at Princeton, Harvard, Cornell, and Penn, using any reasonable assumptions of average numbers of students in classes of various size categories: students at these universities take, on average and over the course of their 4 years as undergraduates, more large than small classes. That is not the case at leading LACs, but it is true at almost any major research university.</p>

<p>You’re a smart guy. Play with the numbers yourself, and let me know if you reach different conclusions.</p>

876

<p>

</p>

<p>LOL. You’re right, there’s a long and glorious tradition of Michigan raiding top Ohio football talent out from under OSU, including coaches Bo Schembechler and Brady Hoke, not to mention Michigan’s two most recent Heisman winners, Desmond Howard (Cleveland St. Joseph) and Charles Woodson (Fremont Ross). Lots of other top talent, too, guys like Dan Dierdorf, Elvis Grbac, Rob Lytle, Jim Mandich, Mario Manningham, Billy Taylor, Bob Timberlake, and dozens more. Michigan’s always been competitive recruiting Ohio, though a bit less so under Rich Rodriguez who just didn’t seem to get it and was always looking for speedy little guys from the South and didn’t go for the tough-as-nails Midwesterners. Good to see Michigan’s Ohio recruiting is not only back under Brady Hoke, but they’re having OSU’s lunch. This recruiting battle could turn into an avalanche.</p>

877

<p>^^okay, I agree with your calculation. But it looked wrong at first based on my personal experience at NU. It turns out actually NU has “better” numbers than Case Western:</p>

<p>Class size / # of classes
2-9 / 761
10-19 / 615
20-29 / 230
30-39 / 94
40-49 / 60
50-99 / 77
100+ / 45
Total: 1,882 classes</p>

<p>The number of classes in the 2-9 range is significantly more at NU, even after considering the proportion. Also, NU offers disproportionally more courses in a quarter than Case Western in a semester, even though each student on average takes less classes per quarter.</p>

878

<p>

I just ran the numbers and NU is the exception. ;)</p>

879

<p>

</p>

<p>Three underappreciated facts:</p>

<p>1) It’s not the percentage of small classes, but the percentage of large classes that matters most. US News is just totally wrong on this, assigning a much greater weight to the percentage of small classes: in their ranking, the percentage of classes <20 counts for 30% of a college’s “faculty resources” score, while the percentage of classes 50+ counts for only 10% of that score. But in fact it’s the percentage of large classes that is more important in determining how much time students spend in large v. small classes, simply because of the overwhelming force of large numbers in the large classes.</p>

<p>2) Yes, as you correctly noted in post #878, I said “almost any research university.” There are exceptions. Northwestern and the University of Chicago actually have far fewer large classes than the Ivies and most other elite universities. At Northwestern, only 6.5% of the classes are large (50+). At Chicago it’s 4.0%. Yale also does pretty well, at 6.9%. But at Harvard it’s 8.3%; Dartmouth 9.4%; WUSTL 9.6%; Brown 10.3%; Princeton 10.9%; Johns Hopkins 11.2%; Stanford 12.2%; MIT 12.6%; and at Cornell a stunning 18.1%. Even at tiny Caltech with only 951 students total, 9.2% of the classes are 50+. At those levels—probably anywhere from around 7.5% large classes and up—students are going to be spending at least as much time in large classes as in small ones, and once you get beyond 10% or so large classes, it really becomes lopsided.</p>

<p>3) The difference between research universities and LACs on this score is huge. At Williams only 3.7% of the classes are 50+; at Amherst 3.3%; Swarthmore 1.8%; Middlebury 2.6%; Wellesley 0.8%; Bowdoin 1.3%; Pomona 1.5%; Carleton 1.2%; Haverford 1.8%; Davidson 0.0%. [That’s right; look at Davidson’s common data set: 0 classes in the 50-99 student range, and 0 in the 100+ range; they only have 2 classes with as many as 40 students]. Even Yale, with fewer large classes than most elite research universities, has more than twice as many large classes (as a percentage of all classes) as Amherst, and more than 5 times as many as Bowdoin. Harvard has 4.6 times as many large classes as Swarthmore. Stanford and MIT have 10 times as many as Carleton has. Now defenders of the research universities will say, “But it’s a choice; these schools have such rich and varied curricula that if you want small classes, there are plenty of opportunities to take small classes.” And to some extent, in some fields, and perhaps generally when you get beyond the intro level, that’s true—though it’s also substantially true at the top publics. Still, there’s no escaping the fact that, on average and in the aggregate, students at these schools in fact end up taking at least as many large classes as small classes, and at some schools more.</p>

880

<p>Texas A&M intent on bolting for SEC</p>

<p>[Texas</a> A&M Aggies intend to join SEC, school official says - ESPN](<a href=“http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story/_/id/6859115/texas-aggies-intend-join-sec-school-official-says]Texas”>Texas A&M Aggies intend to join SEC, school official says - ESPN)</p>

<p>12+1 = 13, SEC will certainly expand to 16 teams!!!</p>

<p>The BIG TEN will certainly respond as well!!! So, who are the lucky 4???</p>

<p>Welcome to the era of Super Conference!! lol</p>

<p>Here are the two biggest questions: </p>

<ol>
<li><p>Will Texas remain in the Big 12 if A&M left for SEC? </p></li>
<li><p>Will Notre Dame reconsider BIG TEN’s offer?</p></li>
</ol>

<p>*I want Texas, ND, Rutgers & Pitt for the Mega BIG TEN (16)!! ;p</p>