<p>Notice that there are quite a few tech schools on the bad list and none (that I recall) on the good list. Engineering isn’t exactly entertaining. That’s primarily what gets high marks, entertainment value. </p>
<p>The better mark is the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), but “Nessy” is private, done for the purposes of edifying the institutions, not selling clicks or magazines.</p>
<p>M</p>
<p>Yes, eyemgh - I call it theatrics. That’s what my S likes (but then he is a film major, so…)</p>
<p>Thanks for the insights. This was helpful to read.</p>
<p>I knew Randolph would be on there. They tout that thing. FYI, Randolph College used to be Randolph-Macon Women’s College. And it’s 550 students. That’s smaller than most high schools. They’re so small they’re admissions people will call you to check up on you while waiting for you to give them a response. I felt so terrible telling them I wouldn’t be attending. But then I got my financial aid e-mail. I’d have to take out $15k in private loans for the first year. In addition to maxing my federal loans. That’s with a $17k merit scholarship and $3k in state grants…</p>
<p>Also, the one article says there are only 2 men’s colleges in the US…But there are 3…Morehouse, Wabash, and Hampden Sydney…</p>
<p>I don’t think that being “hard” is synonymous with being a good professor, or being “easy” is synonymous with being a bad professor. Ultimately, the major goals of education should be to enable you to think and learn on your own.</p>
<p>I think the biggest flaw in this list is the attempt to compare colleges with each other. You really can’t use RMP data to do that, because very, very few of the students using it have attended more than one college. If I take courses from 5 profs at my college, and give a low rating to the “worst” of them, that does not necessarily mean that he is worse than even the best profs at some other school.</p>
<p>Sarah Lawrence was not appreciably more expensive than the other schools my D looked at. However, the physical plant is falling apart a bit.</p>
<p>RateYourProfessor is worse than useless; it’s misleading. As a college professor I can say that disgruntled students report more than happy students. </p>
<p>My colleagues who teach the most often get the worst marks; the guy whose entire class is about hip-hop (freshman comp) who doesn’t require essays gets the best.</p>
<p>I want to echo what another poster said – these ratings are more about the students at the schools than the teachers.</p>
<p>I just looked at RMP. Sheesh. Anybody who tries to draw any conclusions by averaging these ratings is nuts. It might have a tiny bit of value for somebody who is looking for a clue about a specific professor, but even then the results are likely to be contradictory.</p>
<p>Well, I took a second look at RMP, and looked up a few professors that I had 30 years ago and who are still teaching. I have to say, the comments from today are consistent with what I remember: for example, one guy mumbled so you couldn’t understand him, and apparently he still does. Profs I remember as excellent still get good ratings. But all the ratings are inconsistent, and there often aren’t very many of them for any one professor.</p>
<p>I think the comments on RMP are more useful than the absolute numbers. It gives one a sense of the professor’s teaching style and grading methodology.</p>